Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    12,200

    Talking Fat? Don't try to sue McDonalds

    House bans fast-food lawsuits

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a bill Wednesday to ban lawsuits by obese customers who say they became overweight by eating at fast-food restaurants.

    The bill, which passed 276 to 139, is one part of a broader Republican push to reform the nation's civil liability laws by banning what many consider to be "frivolous" lawsuits.

    "Trial lawyers have targeted the fast-food industry as the next big tobacco by bringing these insane lawsuits," said the bill's author, Rep. Ric Keller, R-Florida, referring to cigarette smokers' litigation against tobacco companies.

    "We've got to get back to those old-fashioned principles of personal responsibility, of common sense, and get away from this new culture where everybody plays the victim and blames other people for their problems."

    Many Democrats opposed the bill, as they did a similar liability waiver the House passed for gun manufacturers last year.

    "The courts are handling the cases as they should -- if they're frivolous, they're thrown out," said Rep. Bobby Scott, a Virginia Democrat who opposes the legislation.

    "That's what everyone else has to go through, and I'm not sure why there's any special case to be made for this industry to have their cases tried in the United States Congress rather than the court."

    The National Restaurant Association said the bill is its top priority this year. While only one such lawsuit has been filed -- a case involving New York children against McDonald's that was dismissed -- the industry said it is facing higher insurance costs because of the potential liability.

    "It's a significant issue simply by the impact it could have on the entire industry if one of these suits were to be successful," said association spokesman Brendan Flanagan.

    Some Democrats said they are concerned the bill will make a major sector of the economy exempt from negligence.

    "There's no justification for that," a Democratic Judiciary Committee aide said. "These are not poor struggling businesses who can't defend themselves against unfounded legal claims."

    Approval of the bill comes at the same time McDonald's and other restaurants are facing pressure to stop offering bargain "super-size" meals. Last week, McDonald's announced it would eliminate the super-size choice, citing the need to simplify its menu.

    "It's hard to believe that trial lawyers want to make the claim that 'Ronald McDonald made me do it,' " House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said about the issue. "The point of this debate [is] all about personal responsibility. If you eat too much, you will gain weight."

    Companion legislation is pending in the Senate, but a leadership aide couldn't say when or if it will be taken up.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    NY, NY
    Posts
    3,975
    Those lawsuits are rediculous..
    Mcdonalds doesnt force you to eat their food.
    If you dont want to be fat.. dont eat it.. that simple.

    No reason to sue..
    Bogus case..

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    6,627
    Originally posted by ilyash
    Those lawsuits are rediculous..
    At least as ridiculous is Congress spending time on legislation like this when there's only been one lawsuit filed that would have been affected. It's not like this is a major problem for the restaurant industry or for insurers -- just an opportunity for grandstanding and grabbing headlines by lawmakers who'd better serve their constituents by putting some effort into real issues.
    Specializing in SEO and PPC management.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL USA
    Posts
    2,781
    Yeah, thats crazy, I've heard of only one person tring to sue McDonalds.
    But like ilyash they don't come to your house and force you to eat a Bigmac. Or they don't claim there food is low in fat.
    BTW, I plan on suing Microsoft because, of there Windows software line.
    Where are the Windows? LOL
    (That was a joke)
    CloudRck.com - Host on Cloudrck
    Unmetered VPS Solutions at it's finest

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Jackson, MI
    Posts
    1,526
    "The courts are handling the cases as they should -- if they're frivolous, they're thrown out," said Rep. Bobby Scott, a Virginia Democrat who opposes the legislation.
    They may be handleing them just fine and dismissing them, infact one may never go through, but think of the money, we the take payers are paying for these people to try and get rich.

    It's stupid, and congress should pass laws regarding suing anybody for something the filler had control over(not eating fast food in this case).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    6,627
    Originally posted by biovelocity
    They may be handleing them just fine and dismissing them, infact one may never go through, but think of the money, we the take payers are paying for these people to try and get rich.
    Very little if the courts simply dismiss them. The person filing the suit pays the court costs, and that's it. And again, there's only been one lawsuit filed that would have fallen under this restriction. If that case had been successful, sure there'd be more... but it wasn't, so no one thinking along those lines would be encouraged to go ahead and file.

    What this comes down to is that certain special interest groups have the money to spend to get Congress to write special legislation just for them... why shouldn't they play by the same rules the rest of us do?
    Specializing in SEO and PPC management.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    12,200
    In a different story:

    Employees Bathe in Dishwashing Sink

    ADVANCE, N.C. - Two fast-food restaurant employees who bathed in a dishwashing sink took cleanliness a bit too far, but didn't pose a health threat, the county's health director said.

    The caper came to light because of photographs of the men taking turns posing, in bathing suits, in a large sink full of bubbles, said Barry Bass, director of the Davie County Health Department.

    "From a public-health standpoint, you want the employees to be clean," said Bass, adding that the employees may have overdone it.

    "I have been working in public health for 25 years and have never observed an incident like it."

    The sink at the Wendy's has cleaning jets and is used to wash pots, pans and other cookware.

    Bass said the restaurant won't be cited for any health-code violations, because no health official directly observed a violation.

    The restaurant's manager assured health officials that the sink had been sanitized and that it wouldn't happen again, Bass said.

    Wendy's officials did not return calls for comment.

    A CVS pharmacy employee in Advance who was developing the photographs reported them to the Davie County Sheriff's office last week. The sheriff's office turned the case over to the health department.

    It's not known who took the film to CVS to be developed or when the photos were taken.

    Mike DeAngelis, a CVS spokesman, said it is company policy for photo technicians to notify a store manager if they suspect that a photograph shows illegal activity.

  8. #8
    I have no sympathy for people who get fat through their own foolishness and want to try and blame someone else for it.

    Although I do agree that it is mostly a waste of Congress' time to pass a ban this specific, I can somewhat see the positive side of it. Since our law system works on 'precedent'. This would set the precedent and could be used later to expand the law to cover other frivolous lawsuits that are equally ridiculous. (Thief getting hired while breaking into someone's house and then suing that person for it, that kind of deal).

    EDIT: I realize the 'precedent' thing only applies to cases of law but who knows maybe this will help after all.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    6,627
    Originally posted by speedy007h
    EDIT: I realize the 'precedent' thing only applies to cases of law but who knows maybe this will help after all.
    Let precedent work the way, as you acknowledge, it should work: let a high court make a decision. We have three branches of government for a reason.

    What precedent is being set here, in the looser sense of the term, is an encouragement for more sectors of business to open their wallets, increase their lobbying budgets, toss around more campaign dollars, and get more tailor-made just-for-us legislation. As far as I'm concerned, that brings more bad than good.
    Specializing in SEO and PPC management.

  10. #10
    Two ways to look at the same story I guess. I agree with you (as I stated Congress should be worried about better things) but the precedent you talk about has already been set long time ago - campaign dollars to get tailor-made just for us legislation is a fact of life. So the way I see it, in THAT sense, nothing has changed really.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    1,596
    It is about time. Those lawsuit are rieiculous. Think about this, Mcdonald woudl have been accused of discrimination if they refused to serve obsess customers. Either way McDonald would have been sue, for either refusing customers or for making customers fat.
    Lol! It is about time something is done to stop taking McDonald's money.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    936
    I just think The U.S. House of Representatives wants their super size fries back...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    12,200
    Originally posted by teammobot
    I just think The U.S. House of Representatives wants their super size fries back...
    LMAO

  14. #14
    well, looks like it's time to change the guilty.

    it's not macdonalds that makes you fat, it's the aspartame .. diet coke, nutrasweet, splenda etc.

    http://tinyurl.com/2rms3


    well, someone could sue the tv companies for having less sex home (in bed) ..
    gia

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    12,200
    Originally posted by Giaguara

    well, someone could sue the tv companies for having less sex home (in bed) ..
    With some positions you can both watch tv

  16. #16
    oh gosh, got to practise that before the next soccer matches in tv ..
    gia

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    1,815
    America needs a "loser pays" system, like all other sensible countries, then we could get rid of a lot of these moronic lawsuits.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    The Woodlands, Tx
    Posts
    5,962
    Talking about moronic lawsuits....

    http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/news/biz...cablesuit.html

    Is this the guy who sued, or tried to sue, the fast food chains???

  19. #19
    Originally posted by Webdude
    Talking about moronic lawsuits....

    http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/news/biz...cablesuit.html

    Is this the guy who sued, or tried to sue, the fast food chains???
    lmao

    http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/news/biz...cablesuit.html

    "or three computers"

    rofl, ok..

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •