More Evidence That Lawyers Are Ruining America: You Won't Believe What McDonald's Is Being Sued For Now...

Authored by Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,

One of the fastest ways to ruin anything is to get lawyers involved, and lawyers are running amok in America today.  Several decades ago, Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger warned that our nation would become “a society overrun by hordes of lawyers, hungry as locusts”, and that is precisely what has happened.  There are more than 1.3 million lawyers in the United States today, and it is estimated that those lawyers produce more than 40 million lawsuits each year. 

Many of those lawsuits are completely frivolous, but frivolous lawsuits are often settled because it can be much cheaper to settle them than to defend against them in court.  So it is essentially a form of “legal extortion” that has gotten wildly out of control.

Earlier today I came across another shocking example of this phenomenon.  McDonald’s is actually being sued for charging the same price for a Quarter Pounder with cheese and a Quarter Pounder without cheese…

Two McDonald’s customers in Florida are suing the fast-food giant for a hefty sum of $5 million because they say they’re being unfairly charged for cheese they don’t want on their burgers.

Cynthia Kissner and Leonard Werner argue that hamburgers and cheeseburgers are different prices on the McDonald’s menu, but when they order a Quarter Pounder without the extra dairy, they’re still forced to pay the same amount.

Seriously?

In the end, this is something that nobody cares about, but some lawyers out there saw an opportunity to make a quick buck and so they are going for it.

Once upon a time you could order a Quarter Pounder without cheese right off of the menu.  But if you go into any McDonald’s today you have to specifically ask them to leave the cheese off if you don’t want cheese on your Quarter Pounder.

Apparently, some lawyers in Miami believe that McDonald’s is being “unjustly enriched” because the price is not reduced for those that would like the cheese left off their Quarter Pounders…

According to the lawsuit, filed by Andrew Lavin of the Miami-based Lavin Law Group, McDonald’s used to sell four items in the Quarter Pounder family, with and without cheese, with prices adjusted accordingly — about .30 to .90 cents more for cheese than without.

This practice continued for years, the suit says, but now McDonald’s, “at some point,” ceased “separately displaying these products for purchase on menus, and currently lists the availability of Quarter Pounder with Cheese and Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese.”

I can’t believe that someone should be stupid enough to bring such a lawsuit.  Andrew Lavin should be immediately disbarred for this.

Attorneys like Lavin are financial predators, and fortunately it doesn’t look like McDonald’s is inclined to settle

“We do not believe the claims in this lawsuit have legal merit,” McDonald’s said in an email. “The advertised Quarter Pounder burger comes with cheese. We try to accommodate our customers’ requests by allowing them to customize their orders, such as a Quarter Pounder with no cheese.”

It is rapidly getting to the point where our entire society is becoming paralyzed by fear of lawsuits and legal matters.  Just look at the White House.  President Trump could have gotten so much else done if he wasn’t constantly fighting for his life against a legal witch hunt.  Robert Mueller has been given unlimited time, staff and resources to investigate the President, and it has been over a year and Mueller still hasn’t found anything.

But it looks like his absurd investigation is not going to end any time soon.

After seeing what they have done to Trump, do you think that good people will be encouraged or discouraged from running for public office?

Of course it isn’t just politicians that are being targeted for this kind of thing.  You could literally spend years pouring blood, sweat and tears into building a business, and it can be destroyed in one moment by a single frivolous lawsuit.

And if you are a doctor, a lifetime of exceedingly hard work can be completely wiped out by one really greedy lawyer.

Look, every nation needs a legal system, and we do too.  But today our system is in desperate need of reform.  There are way too many lawyers, way too many lawsuits, and our entire society is rapidly becoming paralyzed by the misuse of legal power.

At one point I was optimistic that someday we would see some much needed reforms, but at this point I do not believe that it is going to happen…

Comments

JimmyJones Shitonya Serfs Tue, 05/29/2018 - 14:21 Permalink

Try to find the License to practice Law issued by your state, they dont exist.  Just a fun fact, you have the State Bar association (private org) issuing a "Bar card", thats it, nothing involving a license.  Also you don't need to be a Lawyer to be a elected Judge, you just need to win the election.  Best book to get your feet wet is https://www.amazon.com/Represent-Yourself-Court-Prepare-Winning/dp/1413…  At least you will know the rules of the game they force you to play.

Not that I agree with the law suit but McDonalds sells food that will kill you slowly so F'em.

In reply to by Shitonya Serfs

Pool Shark RAT005 Tue, 05/29/2018 - 15:04 Permalink

Not to defend lawyers; I really do hate most of them (even though I am one...), but that graphic is very misleading.

In 1878 the US population was only around 39 million, while today it is nearly 330 million.

That makes the ratios of attorneys per capita:

1878: 1 to 601

2018: 1 to 257

So, while that is slightly more than a doubling in 140 years, consider that we were a pre-industrialized nation back then. Modern societies have far fewer agrarian and manual labor jobs, and far more business, financial and banking jobs. Modern society has exponentially more business and financial transactions occurring every day vs. a pre-industrialized one.

How about a graphic showing the number of clerical employees or accountants in 1878 vs. today?...

 

[How many Computer Programmers were there in 1878?]

In reply to by RAT005

Pool Shark NoDebt Tue, 05/29/2018 - 15:10 Permalink

Careful there NoDebt; even good guys need lawyers sometimes...

If it makes you feel any better, I have never been, and never will be a plaintiffs attorney, and I am a supporter of the US going to the British System (i.e., loser pays winner's attorneys fees). That would stop frivolous lawsuits like these. 

In reply to by NoDebt

SACRED-COW HopefulCynical Tue, 05/29/2018 - 16:10 Permalink

Bobby: I'd like a plain omelette, no potatoes, tomatoes instead, a cup of coffee and wheat toast.

Waitress: [points at his menu] No substitutions.

Bobby: What do you mean? You don't have any tomatoes?

Waitress: Only what's on the menu. You can have a number two, a plain omelette, it comes with cottage fries and rolls.

Bobby: Yeah, I know what it comes with, but it's not what I want.

Waitress: Well, I'll come back when you make up your mind

Bobby: Wait a minute, I have made up my mind. I'd like a plain omelette, no potatoes on the plate, a cup of coffee and a side order of wheat toast.

Waitress: I'm sorry, we don't have any side orders of toast. I'll give you an English muffin or a coffee roll.

Bobby: What do you mean you don't make side orders of toast? You make sandwiches, don't you?

Waitress: Would you like to talk to the manager?

Palm Apodaca: Hey, mac...

Bobby: Shut up.

[to the waitress]

Bobby: You've got bread and a toaster of some kind?

Waitress: I don't make the rules.

Bobby: OK, I'll make it as easy for you as I can. I'd like an omelette, plain, and a chicken salad sandwich on wheat toast, no mayonnaise, no butter, no lettuce, and a cup of coffee.

Waitress: A number two, a chicken salad sand. Hold the butter, the lettuce, and the mayonnaise, and a cup of coffee. Anything else?

Bobby: Yeah, now all you have to do is hold the chicken, bring me the toast, give me a cheque for the chicken salad sandwich, and you haven't broken any rules.

Waitress: You want me to hold the chicken, huh?

Bobby: I want you to hold it between your knees.

[Palm Apodaca sniggers]

Waitress: [points at a sign behind her] You see that sign, sir? Yes, you'll all have to leave! I'm not taking any more of your smartness and sarcasm!

Bobby: You see this sign?

[he sweeps all the glasses off the table onto the floor]

In reply to by HopefulCynical

vato poco SACRED-COW Tue, 05/29/2018 - 16:50 Permalink

until the accursed '70's came along, nobody in the world would consider fucking with a minimum-wage waitress to be edgy & counter-culture & fightin' the POWER, maaaaan. 

then came the '70's. 

oh and BTW, Jack Nicholson is and always has been enormously overrated

In reply to by SACRED-COW

AGuy HopefulCynical Tue, 05/29/2018 - 18:55 Permalink

"Fucking ridiculous. McD's stopped putting the QP w/o cheese on the menu because nobody ever ordered it."

FWIW: I never order any food with "Cheeze". What they put on is not cheese but a chemical concoction. If you look at a package of American "cheeze" is states it does not contain real cheese. Eating that crap is disgusting, but Americans do all sorts of weird crap.

In reply to by HopefulCynical

mkkby HopefulCynical Tue, 05/29/2018 - 22:16 Permalink

I ordered a sandwich "hold the pickles".  I should sue for millions because they didn't deduct the 3 cent pickle slice.

My shirt had a button missing... millions.  My shoe had some lint, not new... millions.  My 12 oz coke was 2 ml short of 12 oz...

Any sane judge would throw this out immediately without trial.  And warn the attorney that anything further could result in license revocation.

In reply to by HopefulCynical

jin187 CJgipper Tue, 05/29/2018 - 17:15 Permalink

What we need is a combination of loser pays, and a simplification of legal proceedings.  There's no reason it should take a year, or even years to get a case like this to trial, while the lawyers purposely try to find ridiculous ways to rack up billable hours.  All trials should be nothing but a few weeks to gather evidence, witnesses, and issue subpoenas for discovery, followed by a bulk presentation of it all to a judge, that quickly makes a decision of what the jury will be allowed to see.  A competent judge should be able to have their clerk find out if the state or feds have any statues that are violated by this pricing policy, and issue a snap decision.  Instead this case will probably see hundreds of thousands in legal fees generated by filing pointless motions on both sides, before the case ever reaches a lengthy and overly complex trial.  Over a piece of fucking cheese, and like $0.40.  That's nothing short of insane.

In reply to by CJgipper

jin187 cheech_wizard Tue, 05/29/2018 - 16:58 Permalink

Patience.  They honor just about any claim in the end, no matter how fraudulent.  You just have to not starve while you wait for them to fold.  There's plenty of lawyers that will take the case under a "free unless you win" agreement, and whether you win or lose, you never pay a dime, because Social Security has to pay them if you win.

In reply to by cheech_wizard

Citxmech Pool Shark Tue, 05/29/2018 - 19:06 Permalink

The whole "frivolous lawsuit" meme was invented by the McKinsey Consulting firm as an extension of their research that indicated that insurance companies would net more money if they fought every single lawsuit like the world depended on it.

Yes, some pretty stupid suits get filed, but they are actually relatively rare.  Most companies actually don't settle stupid suits - they know that this just would encourage ambulance chasers (see the McKinsey report above).  

As a law firm, would you want to risk filing stupid suits on contingency that will just get dismissed on summary judgment?  As a company, would you throw money at a case you could easily get dismissed and reward a bad actor?  

State "empty chair" rules do more to encourage adding everyone under the sun as defendants in lawsuits, which is a bigger cause of increased litigation costs, fwiw.

PS, loser pays sucks ass.  It often prevents legitimate claims from being filed because of the risk.

In reply to by Pool Shark

ChanceIs RAT005 Tue, 05/29/2018 - 16:07 Permalink

Only time I go to McDonalds is when I am on the road.

The only thing I buy at McDonalds is coffee.

I buy the coffee because I feel a moral obligation to give them something in return for the use of their bathroom - which is the reason I go there when I am on the road.

Starbucks should value me as a client.

I will purposely never go in a Starbucks now even if I am about to explode.  Maybe lean against the wall in back ;-)

In reply to by RAT005