New Documentary Debunks Urban Legend of McDonald's Coffee Case

This past weekend, I had the pleasure of listening to Susan Saladoff discuss her new documentary, "Hot Coffee", which recently aired on HBO. Of course, the provocative title - "Hot Coffee" - refers to the much-maligned civil lawsuit involving an elderly lady, Stella Liebeck, who suffered burns after she spilled McDonald's coffee in her lap. The case became corporate America's rallying cry for so called "tort reform" - an organized effort to restrict civil lawsuits and limit the compensation injured people could receive from a jury. After watching the documentary, however, a much different picture emerges.

First of all the idea this was a minor burn case is totally false. The documentary shows the actual photographs used at trial depicting Ms. Liebeck's injuries. Imagine blackened, charred skin throughout her groin and inner thighs - unforgettable and deeply troubling images. She required multiple skin grafts and lengthy physical therapy. She never fully recovered from her injuries.

Also, the popular media image of the diminutive grand-mother from New Mexico is that of a greedy, money-hungry woman looking for "jackpot justice" from a wealthy corporation. The truth is that Ms. Liebeck asked McDonald's to pay only her out-of-pocket medical bills that were not covered by Medicare. McDonald's offered her $800 to go away. Only then did Ms. Liebeck retain an attorney to pursue a claim.

Below is a link to the official trailer of "Hot Coffee". I urge you to watch it and share your comments. The movie is also available on Netflix.

Hot Coffee Trailer

Please visit us at BellLawFirm.com.

A Bad Day for Georgia Citizens - Georgia Supreme Court Strikes Down Informed Consent

Today, the Georgia Supreme Court dealt a blow to patient's rights. In their wisdom, the Court determined that Georgia citizens do not have the right to be informed of the material risks of medical procedures, except in very limited circumstances.  In the case of Doreika v. Blotner, the Court found that medical professionals do not have to inform their patients of the risks of dangerous procedures and do not have to obtain their patients' informed consent before proceeding with treatment.  So understand how this works:  a young woman goes to see a chiropractor with complaints of headache. The chiropractor recommends manipulating her neck, without advising her that such a procedure can cause STROKE.  The woman does indeed suffer stroke.  The Georgia Supreme Court decision means the chiropractor cannot be held responsible for crippling this woman because he had no duty to ever advise his patient of the risks. Hopefully, the Georgia Legislature will remedy this unfortunate decision and restore patients' rights.