Every once in awhile, a movie comes along that challenges long held beliefs and makes you question how much you really know about a particular subject like tort reform. I haven’t stopped thinking about the new HBO documentary Hot Coffee www.hotcoffeethemovie.com since I finished watching it

this week. I was blown away by the rampant ignorance of the average American regarding issues like mandatory arbitration which really and truly do affect every single one of us. I’m frightened by the power unleashed by the U.S. Chamber and big corporations in the last two decades which have influenced and changed public policy in such a way as to limit the civil rights of average American citizens. Big money buys big influence and the true impact of tort reform legislation, which includes caps on damages resulting from civil suits is only truly being felt right now in the states that have approved such legislation. Even people who voted for tort reform are now having second thoughts as they see their right to seek damages in open court and confront the parties that harmed them being severely restricted or denied.

The powers of big business led by Karl Rove and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce took the case of Stella Liebeck vs McDonald’s Corporation, which should have been a damming example of corporate disregard for consumers harmed by their products or services and used it to their advantage. They managed to drive the American public toward support of tort reform by simply lying and distorting the facts of the Liebeck case and demonizing a woman who suffered mightily at the hands of the behemoth that is the McDonald’s Corporation.

Contrary to popular belief and the reports of major news organizations, the elderly Mrs. Liebeck was a passenger in a car driven by her nephew at the time of the incident. After purchasing their food and drinks at the drive through window of McDonald’s Restaurant, the nephew parked the car to allow Mrs. Liebeck to put cream and sugar in her coffee. When she attempted to replace the lid of the coffee, the cup broke spilling the coffee (heated to a temperature of 180 degrees) in her lap. She suffered 3^rd degree burns on her thighs that required skin grafts. Mrs. Liebeck and her family initially asked McDonald’s for reimbursement of limited medical expenses not covered by Medicare but were refused. It was later revealed that 700 other people had been burned by hot coffee served up by McDonald’s. The jury was so moved by the facts of the case and the cavalier attitude exhibited by McDonald’s corporate executives that they chose to award compensatory and punitive damages to send a message to McDonald’s and other service industries to be more pro-active about potentially dangerous products.

There are many lessons to be gleaned from Hot Coffee. Among them; don’t believe everything you read and hear in the mass media, even credible news organizations can be duped. Don’t just assume because there are large damages awarded in a civil case that the plaintiff is an opportunist. These cases are heard by a jury of our peers. They sift through the facts and award damages based on merit. Would you rather have a group of legislators decide what the limits of your compensation should be based on some arbitrary figure applied to all plaintiffs or ask a jury to deliberate the facts and decide based on your unique circumstance? Simply getting your case into court is a long arduous process, by limiting damages you inhibit a jury to render justice. We shouldn’t forfeit our rights without question or even debate but that’s exactly what’s happened in the case of tort reform. Watch Hot Coffee and see what you think.