And sadly, the public has swallowed this propaganda—hook, line, and sinker.

Why would Corporate America want to discredit civil lawsuits?
The answer is simple: profits over people. By undermining the right of individuals to seek justice through the courts, corporations reduce their accountability for negligent and harmful conduct. Civil lawsuits are one of the few tools that force powerful interests to take responsibility. Limit those lawsuits, and you limit consequences. It’s that straightforward.

How does the propaganda work?
By fueling a false narrative of a “lawsuit crisis,” the public is stirred into demanding reform. Politicians—particularly those who proudly wear the “conservative” label—are more than happy to oblige. But not without a price. The loudest voices for lawsuit restrictions also tend to receive the most generous campaign contributions from corporate donors.

In response, these lawmakers push so-called “tort reform” laws that make it increasingly difficult for everyday Americans to take on big business in court. These laws don’t just stack the deck—they lock the courtroom doors.

It’s been happening for years, and it’s not just concerning—it’s dangerous. This is big business run amok.

Let’s go back to the McDonald’s coffee case.

Here are the facts:

In 1994, a New Mexico jury awarded $2.9 million to Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman who suffered third-degree burns after spilling McDonald’s coffee on her lap. She was seated in a parked car, attempting to add cream and sugar when the coffee spilled. She sustained burns so severe that she was hospitalized for eight days, required skin grafts, and was left with permanent scarring and pain. Her medical bills exceeded $11,000.

Before filing suit, Ms. Liebeck simply asked McDonald’s to cover her medical expenses. The company offered $800.

Here’s what the public rarely hears:

• McDonald’s served its coffee at 195–205°F. Liquids at that temperature can cause third-degree burns in 3 seconds or less.
• Experts testified that coffee at 160°F (a much safer temperature) would take 20 seconds to cause the same damage—time enough to react and avoid serious injury.
• McDonald’s internal documents showed it had received over 700 burn complaints from hot coffee in the previous 10 years. The company had already paid out over $500,000 to settle similar claims.
• The jury awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages, reduced to $160,000 because Ms. Liebeck was found 20% at fault. They also awarded $2.7 million in punitive damages—roughly two days’ worth of McDonald’s coffee revenue—based on findings that McDonald’s acted with willful disregard for consumer safety.
• The judge later reduced the punitive award to $480,000. Both sides appealed and the case was ultimately settled for an undisclosed amount.
• The day after the verdict, the temperature of the coffee at that McDonald’s location was tested—reduced to 158°F.

Ms. Liebeck was not a serial litigant. She was a retired clerk, injured by a dangerously hot product. Her case was tried before a fair and impartial judge, with competent counsel on both sides, and a jury of everyday Americans. This wasn’t a rogue decision—it was the justice system working as designed.

The Bigger Picture

The Founding Fathers enshrined the civil jury system in the Constitution for a reason: it is the best safeguard a free society has against unchecked power. It’s not perfect, but it works remarkably well—if we let it. When mistakes occur, the system has mechanisms to correct them through judicial oversight and appellate review.

The smear campaign against the civil justice system isn’t about protecting the public from “greedy lawyers” or “runaway juries.” It’s about protecting corporate profits by weakening your right to hold wrongdoers accountable.

Believe in the civil jury system. It’s one of the last remaining ways for everyday people to stand on equal footing with the most powerful interests in our society.

*********************************************************

Contact us toll free at 866-785-GALE or by email (jgale@jeffgalelaw.com) for a free, confidential consultation to learn your legal rights.

Jeffrey P. Gale, P.A. is a South Florida based law firm committed to the judicial system and to representing and obtaining justice for individuals – the poor, the injured, the forgotten, the voiceless, the defenseless and the damned, and to protecting the rights of such people from corporate and government oppression. We do not represent government, corporations or large business interests.

While prompt resolution of your legal matter is our goal, our approach is fundamentally different. Our clients are “people” and not “cases” or “files.” We take the time to build a relationship with our clients, realizing that only through meaningful interaction can we best serve their needs. In this manner, we have been able to best help those requiring legal representation.

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Jury trials allow everyday citizens, guided by the law and the facts, to pass judgment on civil matters between contesting parties. The concept is that the collective wisdom of juries consisting of our peers, devoid of bias and preference, will render just decisions. The system, which, in my view, is the greatest system devised by any society for handling such matters, has worked remarkably well.

Arbitration is a threat to the civil jury trial system. Wikipedia describes Arbitration as “a form of alternative dispute resolution that resolves disputes outside the judiciary courts. The dispute will be decided by one or more persons, which renders the ‘arbitration award'”. For the most part, arbitrators are lawyers and former judges. In Florida, court-appointed arbitrators must be members of The Florida Bar.

There are two main ways parties end up in arbitration. When it is by court-appointment, the parties must agree to arbitrate. Without this agreement, the case will stay within the judicial court system and proceed to a trial by jury unless the plaintiff, the complaining party, has requested a bench trial. The other way parties end up in arbitration is if the complaining party signed a document at the outset of his or her relationship with the other party consenting to resolve disputes through arbitration. Arbitration clauses are commonly found in consumer contracts and employment contracts. For example, the typical contract for cell phone services between customer and provider, say AT&T, will contain an arbitration provision. We’ve all signed these agreements without reading the fine print.

Some arbitration agreements have profound consequences. In Massage Envy Franchising, LLC v. Jane Doe, 47 Fla. L. Weekly D1151 (Fla. 5th DCA May 27, 2022), a woman filed a multicount complaint against Massage Envy alleging that her massage therapist sexually assaulted her during a massage. She requested a jury trial. Massage Envy responded by filing a pleading seeking to compel arbitration. The trial court denied Massage Envy’s request. Massage Envy appealed the ruling. The 5th District Court of Appeal reversed the lower court, thus forcing the sexual assault claim to be decided by a paid arbitrator rather than a jury of everyday citizens. The arbitration provision in Massage Envy was contained within a sixteen-page Terms of Use Agreement Ms. Doe was handed when she checked in for her massage appointment.

Sadly, while arbitration is generally favored by the courts, Massage Envy, it can and should be challenged. Because arbitration is highly disfavored by plaintiffs, who prefer their day in court, a significant amount of case law has been developed over the years through challenges. This is the subject of another blog.

*********************

Contact us at 305-758-4900 or by email to learn your legal rights.

Jeffrey P. Gale, P.A. is a South Florida based law firm committed to the judicial system and to representing and obtaining justice for individuals – the poor, the injured, the forgotten, the voiceless, the defenseless and the damned, and to protecting the rights of such people from corporate and government oppression. We do not represent government, corporations or large business interests.

While prompt resolution of your legal matter is our goal, our approach is fundamentally different. Our clients are “people” and not “cases” or “files.” We take the time to build a relationship with our clients, realizing that only through meaningful interaction can we best serve their needs. In this manner, we have been able to best help those requiring legal representation.

DISCLAIMER: This information provided by Jeffrey P. Gale, P.A. is for informational purposes only and is intended to be used as a non-legal guide prior to consultation with an attorney familiar with your specific legal situation. It should not be considered legal advice or counseling. No such legal advice or counseling is either expressly or impliedly intended. This information is not a substitute for the advice or counsel of an attorney. If you require legal advice, you should seek the services of an attorney.