Hot coffee

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Movie
Original title Hot coffee
Country of production United States of America
original language English
Publishing year 2011
length 88 minutes
Rod
Director Susan Saladoff
script Cindy Lee
production Carly Hugo, Alan Oxman
music Michael Mollura
camera Martina Radwan

Hot Coffee is a 2011 documentary directed by Susan Saladoff. The film premiered on January 24, 2011 as part of the Sundance Film Festival and was first broadcast on June 27, 2011 on the US television channel HBO . The subject of the film is the American tort law ( tort law ), its abuse in the form of frivolous claims (unjustified claims for damages ) as well as the controversial approaches to tort reform .

content

The film title is an allusion to the Liebeck v. McDonald's restaurants from 1994. The retiree Stella Liebeck from New Mexico had made claims for damages and compensation for pain and suffering against the fast food chain McDonald’s because she was severely scalded from spilled coffee . The jury awarded Stella Liebeck $ 2.7 million in punitive damages. The case attracted a great deal of public attention, as Stella Liebeck had spilled the coffee in the car herself and the damages awarded by the jury seemed to be out of proportion to the matter. As a result, for example, the Stella Award was brought into being, which “honors” people who unjustifiably or at least curiously demanded and in some cases received judicial damages.

The film presents a total of four cases that are related to the much-discussed tort reform in the USA :

  1. Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants: Stella Liebeck died in 2004, so her relatives comment on the case. The public did not know how severe the third-degree burns suffered, which the film documents with photographs. In addition, the judge reduced the millions of dollars in damages initially awarded by the jury to a fraction of US $ 640,000, with the disputing parties agreeing on an even lower amount in the appeal hearing. McDonald's also recognized the allegation (coffee was too hot) and reduced the holding temperature of the coffee by 10 ° F (5.3 ° C).
  2. Colin Gourley: The now 17-year-old boy has mental and physical disabilities due to a medical malpractice during pregnancy. A jury had awarded compensation for damages based on projections of the treatment costs and additional expenses likely to be incurred during his life. Since the amount of damages in the US state of Nebraska is capped ( damage cap ), the amount was reduced to a quarter. As a result, the boy is dependent on basic state medical care for the rest of his life .
  3. Oliver Diaz was a judge on the Supreme Court of Mississippi from 2000 to 2008 . His case shows how companies in the United States influence candidates for judicial office financially in favor of compensation caps. For example, a competitor for the judge's office received grants amounting to millions, Diaz was defamed in election advertisements and proceedings for bribery and tax evasion were initiated, in which he was later acquitted. The case was thematized by the author John Grisham in the novel The Appeal .
  4. Jamie Leigh Jones v. Halliburton Co. doing business as KBR : 19-year-old Jennifer Leigh Jones accepted a job with Halliburton company KBR in Iraq in 2005 . On her fourth day in Iraq, she was drugged by KBR employees, including multiple vaginal and anal rape, with serious injuries. The next morning she was locked in a container by KBR employees and only released after the intervention of the US MP Ted Poe, who had been asked for help by Jones' father. Jones also accuses KBR of having made evidence disappear. The film argues that due to a clause in Jones' employment contract ( mandatory arbitration ), she is unable to sue for damages in a KBR civil court.

central message

Overall, the film points out that many civil claims for damages are presented to the public as unjustified ( frivolous ) and that this is partly due to a lack of public information about the facts. In the case of Stella Liebeck, many people remembered the millions in damages awarded by the jury, although the amount actually negotiated was much lower in comparison and the pensioner still had to pay the legal fees. Additionally, by lowering the coffee-holding temperature, McDonald's has admitted that the temperature was set too high.

With regard to the capping of damage caps , the film uses the example of Judge Diaz to demonstrate how companies influence business-friendly jurisdiction at the Supreme Courts of the states, and the example of the disabled Colin Gourley shows that a cap on diversity does not do justice to the possible cases.

The case of Jamie Leigh Jones eventually leads the effects of widespread in the US contract clauses regarding. Mandatory arbitration (binding arbitration ) in mind. By signing such a clause, for example, an employee waives all civil law remedies against the employer and, in the event of a legal dispute, agrees to the appeal of an arbitration body, which is, however, selected by the employer (and in fact almost always judges in favor of the employer). The film points out that such a clause has found widespread use in the USA and is developing into the standard for credit card or leasing contracts, for example, without the customers being aware of the meaning of this clause.

Web links