Wednesday, July 16, 2008

The Wacky World of Lawsuits

Two recent lawsuits have made me stop and think a little. The first one comes from New Jersey. It seems that a New Jersey woman has sued her orthopedic surgeon after awakening from surgery to find a temporary tattoo below her panty line.

Elizabeth Mateo, of Camden County, New Jersey, filed her lawsuit Tuesday saying she found “a temporary tattoo of a red rose” below her panty line the morning after her surgery for a herniated disc, her attorney, Gregg A. Shivers, said.

Her surgeon, Steven Kirshner, does not deny he placed a tattoo on Mateo. His lawyer, Robert Agre, told the local paper that the doctor has left washable marks on patients before to improve their spirits as they heal. “What’s offensive about this complaint is that it suggests something he did was intended to be prurient, and nothing could be further from the truth,” Agre told the paper. “It was intended just to make the patient feel better.”

Hmmm…I wonder about this. How about you? Seems a little strange to me. Why not place the mark, if one has to be done, on her arm, or hand even. Why not write, “I hope you feel better!” on her bandage. Seems a little strange. A rose? The location?

The second lawsuit comes from Omaha, Nebraska. A hearing-impaired woman has filed a federal lawsuit against a local McDonald’s, saying workers there refused to let her order food at the drive-thru window.

Karen Tumeh of Lincoln says they insisted she either order at the electronic speaker along the drive-thru lane or come inside to order. Tumeh wears a hearing aid but still cannot hear while using the drive-thru ordering box at fast-food restaurants, according to the lawsuit.

At least three times since September 2007, workers at a Lincoln McDonald’s refused to let her place her order at the drive-thru window, Tumeh said. In denying her service, McDonald’s violated the federal Americans With Disabilities Act, she said. Tumeh’s lawsuit seeks to force McDonald’s to make accommodations for hearing-impaired people to order food in restaurant drive-thrus.

Tumeh is physically capable of walking inside to order, but that’s not the point, her attorney, Shirley Ann Mora James, said Tuesday. “She has children who are autistic, and if they’re having difficulties, it would make it problematic for her,” Mora James said.
“It’s not appropriate for a hearing-impaired person to be forced to go inside because of their disability, when ... other drive-thru, fast-food restaurants have a policy to allow deaf and hard-of-hearing people to order at the drive-thru window.”

Other McDonald’s restaurants in Lincoln have accommodated Tumeh, Mora James said.
“We have attempted to resolve this on many occasions and have unfortunately been unable to resolve this,” Mora James said. “So we were forced into litigation.”

Again, so many questions. However, I’ll focus only on the last statement, made by her attorney: “So we were forced into litigation.” Who forced them? Why was there force involved at all? Other McDonald’s served her, other fast-food places served her.

You know, many times in my life, I’ve gotten bad service at a restaurant or drive-thru. Not once did I ever think about suing! Not once. I did complain to the manager. I’ve even complained to their corporate headquarters. But suing? Nope. I just take my business and money elsewhere!

What do you think about these two suits? Thoughts? Comments?

11 comments:

  1. Steve

    I'm on the fence about the deaf lady. I can see what you're saying about taking your business elsewheree. However, at the McD's I go to there is a sign saying if you have problems ordering at the drive thru box to pull up. It just doesn't seem like that unreasonable of a request to take her order at the window. As to the woman who woke up with the tatoo I'm not sure she could prove anything illegal happened. Of course, my legal education consists of two business law classes and watching reruns of Matlock so what do I knokw.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Two of my favorite shows of all time: Matlock and Columbo.

    I guess I love it when the "underdog" wins!

    I'll be curious to see if the people who will comment here agree or disagree with your comments. Time will tell.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have mixed emotions on the first but not the second. I can see her point and YET I have recently had rotator cuff surgery and even for that I was in my birthday suit except for that excuse for a gown. So it isn't like he didn't see her in all her glory. (hope that doesn't offend anyone). We are also not told if that tattoo is in the front or back. if in front she may have a gripe but not a lawsuit. The deaf lady has a beef (no pun intended) with McBarf's but not a lawsuit. A reprimand to that particular McBarf's and "sensitivity training" (now there's a joke) but the lawsuit should be thrown out. I would take my business elsewhere...any where else but the golden arches.

    Want to know how I really feel about that particular "restaurant"? :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bill...you've really got to learn to speak your mind...

    You are so timid!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hmmm. The first one somehow just doesn't sit "right" with me. If it were my wife that woke up with the temporary tat, I'd darn sure be talking with the doctor, the chief of surgeons and the hospital CEO about that. That whole thing just seems inappropriate to me and very well could be worthy of litigation.

    The McDonald's one, well, first of all, who would CHOOSE to go to McD's on purpose? That would bring a whole "question of judgment" into the arena. McDonald's has been sued way too often for way to much over way too little. Remember the hot coffee in the lap for $38,000,000 back in the 80's or so? I think that they should have accommodated her, but I don't think she should sue over it.

    I think we need a total overhaul of the American "judicial" system, especially tort reform.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I just gotta learn to read. I read it as "a red NOSE." duh.

    Like someone alluded to, "below the panty line" is pretty vague. There is a good chance she had no clothes no, and if she wears "granny-panties" (sorry for the visual), that could cover a lot of territory. :) Lawsuit? I wouldn't think so, but she is not me, etc. so I don't know.

    The rose? The location? Roses are fast and easy to draw. Location already answered. For a surgery on her herniated disk, the arm or leg might seem even stranger.

    In the second case, I am really surprised. At all the fast food places I've been in the recent past, there are indeed signs instructing you to come around. Sounds to me like someone didn't know how to do it without messing up all the orders.

    And, I would be interested in knowing if she "complained" the first two times.

    So much we don't know, and that makes me hesitant to say "yea" or "nay" for any of the cases.

    I do think, generally speaking, here in America, we tend to go after a lawsuit when an apology (or change in policy) would be quite sufficient.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I need more information. Where exactly below the panty line? If in the front near the hedges... lawsuit!

    Did Corporate McD's know about this? They usually take this stuff VERY seriously. I know. I've complained to them before. They're on it. So???

    Heidi Reed

    ReplyDelete
  8. Rick
    You wrote "Remember the hot coffee in the lap for $38,000,000 back in the 80's or so?"

    I had a teacher for Law for Accountants who studied under someone who litigated that case. That McD's had been using much hotter water than it was supposed to for making coffee and had been reprimanded about it. Not trying to start an arguement. I'm just sayin'.....

    ReplyDelete
  9. Joe,

    Now THAT'S funny! Reprimanded for using water that was too hot!?!

    When I go to Starbucks, I almost ALWAYS ask for "extra hot". ;-)

    I always thought that particular law suit represented what was wrong with our law system. One thing McDonald's does part-way right is their coffee. Most people's definition of "good coffee" includes terms like "piping hot", "scalding hot", "boiling hot", etc.

    But 38 million bucks?

    That would buy nearly a year's worth of gasoline in today's market.

    ReplyDelete
  10. nearly. :)

    at the risk of being totally unlady-like, as far as "near the hedges" in the surgery -- when Bernard had his heart surgery, he was shaved from the knees up.

    just saying . . .

    ReplyDelete
  11. Karma, when I had my appendix removed, I was shaved from knees to nose...yet, when I had nose surgery, they didn't even shave my beard or mustache!

    I think some doctors are razor happy!

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for sharing your thoughts! I can't wait to read what you have written.