Everyone knows the case of the woman who sued McDonald s over spilled coffee. Or do they? More than 15 years after making international news, the case continues to be cited as an example of citizens who use frivolous lawsuits to take unfair advantage of the American legal system. But is that an accurate portrayal of the facts?
An eye-opening documentary with jaw-dropping revelations, HOT COFFEE exposes how corporations spend millions on propaganda campaigns to distort Americans' view of lawsuits forever changing the civil justice system. By examining the impact of tort reform on the lives of ordinary citizens, the film shows how Americans give up their Constitutional rights in all sorts of ways without knowing it for example, by voting for caps on damages or signing away your rights in contracts. Through interviews with politicians, judges, lawyers and ordinary citizens, first-time filmmaker and former public-interest lawyer Susan Saladoff delves into the facts of four cases to tear apart the conventional wisdom about jackpot justice.
- Deleted Scenes
- Interview with the Director
- Take Action
Many people recall the infamous 1994 episode in which an elderly woman named Stella Liebeck spilled a cup of scalding hot McDonald's coffee in her lap, resulting in major burns and a lawsuit against the restaurant chain that earned her nearly $2.6 million in damages (many fewer remember that the amount was very substantially reduced in a subsequent judgment). Filmmaker Susan Saladoff obviously remembers--the incident provided the title for and is featured prominently in Hot Coffee, her documentary about the nature of civil suits. But Saladoff, who is herself a lawyer, has an unexpected take on the matter. The Liebeck case, the film suggests, was in fact a public relations coup for McDonald's, who helped turn it into Exhibit A in the campaign to limit so-called "frivolous" lawsuits, also known as "tort reform." But while those who advocated tort reform contended that it would be good for everyone, including taxpayers, the principal beneficiary was big business (President George W. Bush's crusade to limit medical malpractice suits is represented here as a gift to giant insurance companies), while genuine victims, including Liebeck, were denied justice (when several man-on-the-street interviewees are shown graphic photos of her severe injuries, they quickly change their tunes about the frivolity of her suit). Other serious charges are leveled in the course of the film, which argues that caps on the amount of damages awarded by juries in civil suits have been disastrous for deserving plaintiffs; that the big business-loving U.S. Chamber of Commerce has helped defeat any number of state supreme court justices whose rulings have favored plaintiffs over corporate defendants; and that the insistence by many companies that employees sign contracts forbidding them to sue their employers, forcing them to instead submit to mandatory arbitration, has put their fates into the hands of people hired solely to protect the company's interests (the tale of one young woman who worked for Halliburton in Iraq is especially disturbing). It's unlikely that Hot Coffee will be garnering many positive reviews on Fox News, as the film's point of view is decidedly pro-consumer/anti-corporation. Still, regardless of one's political leanings, it will be hard not to be shocked by what it says about our legal system. --Sam GrahamSee all Editorial Reviews
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
I've bought this documentary and now await its delivery. I plan to show the documentary to students in my marketing classes--undergraduate and MBA students. The documentary brings to mind a sentence in Garrison Keilor's Home Grown Democrat (book) about the evil of the Republican national platform. With the support of big business interests, "tort reform" (really "tort deform" as Ralph Nadar identifies it) is almost impossible to stop. Too much money is behind the movement to pass "tort reform" laws to stop these campaigns from succeeding--especially when a Republican is in the White House. G W Bush appears in the documentary delivering a speech on "tort reform" with teenagers and young adults appearing behind him--they reallyl know not what they are doing there.
Tort payments represents very small percentages of profits for the firms found guilty of doing such harm in court cases involving torts. The documentary deserves a follow-up documentary confirming this point. Juries are making sound judgments. Hot Coffee is on par with Academy Award Winner, the "Inside Job".
And Haliburton...this is where our hard earned tax dollars go, to support monsters like them. The public should certainly have a voice in civil jury service to police them. Yet they effectively shut out the very public who funnel money to them. These big corporations deserve exposure so the public has the option to stop buying their products. I would really like to see televised campaign attack ads become illegal to air unless they can be fully proven. And stop corporate's ability to fund these ads and to greatly influence the judicial system.
Bravo to Senator Al Franken who has lent his great voice and mind to real justice. I also appreciate author John Grisham more than ever for his exposure of judicial scams. And lastly, the dear woman who was wronged by McDonalds( who's lawyers led a smear campaign against her) when all she wanted was reform of McDonalds policy for scalding coffee temperature and weak lids to protect the rest of the public, has been vindicated, apreciated and understood for the hero she is.