From: slb3y@cc.usu.edu (Punk Rocketeer)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.urban,misc.legal
Subject: Multimillion-$ jury award
Date: 26 Aug 92 09:09:36 MDT
Organization: United Order of Non-joiners

     Well, here it is, only about 4 months after I promised it.  The
great 7-Up case that everyone quotes, but that Ted Frank has never
seen.

     The name of the case is May Roberts v. Alcoa.  I don't know the
year, but it was in the late '80s, as I recall.  And plaintiff's first
name might be spelled Mae.  Please be patient if I misuse legal terms. 
I'm not a lawyer, but I do know a couple, and my understanding of the
terms might be off a little.  Case was in Utah, btw.

     The undisputed facts in the case are:  Mae Roberts used pliers to
open a bottle of 7-Up.  She was a regular drinker of 7-Up, and being
80something years old, used the pliers because she did not have the
strength to manage with just her fingers.  In this case, the cap came
off rather violently and hit her in the eye, causing loss of eyesight
and incurring some $6,000+ in medical expenses.  This virtually
destroyed her ability to enjoy what she claimed were her typical
leisure activities--gardening, reading, and needlepoint.
                          
     Plaintiff argued that 7-Up and Alcoa were at fault because the
cap was improperly attached to the bottle.  Presumably the process
Alcoa used did not seal the cap to the bottle tightly enough, allowing
it to pop off instead of requiring that it be unscrewed.  Plaintiff
and counsel also produced an expert witness to back up this claim.

     Defense countered that this explanation was not true.  Instead,
they claimed, plaintiff must have attempted to remove the cap by
twisting it the wrong way, thereby causing the injury herself. 
Defense also produced an expert witness to back up their claim.

     At least two things convinced the jury that plaintiff was
correct.  Plaintiff produced a witness whose daughter had suffered the
same kind of accident, though without using pliers.  And the day
arguments ended, plaintiff's expert witness went to lunch with the
lawyer's secretary.  After lunch, they went to a local store and found
four bottles of 7-Up with precisely the defect that the expert witness
claimed caused the accident.

     The jury awarded plaintiff said $6,000+ in medical expenses, $1
million in pain and suffering, and $10 million in punitive damages. 
The $10 million was intended to represent the profit on 7-Up for that
fiscal year in which the accident took place, so it was not arbitrary.

     The judge decided that an 80something-year-old woman did not need
over $11 million, and filed a writ of remittadae (?  something like
that anyway) reducing the award to a total of $375,000.  What happened
on appeal?  I don't even know if it was appealed, to be honest.  I
didn't ask.  Those of you with connections to major legal databases
can probably figure it out for yourselves.  The rest of you can be mad
at me for not following through completely.

     One caveat and one plea:  I am not entirely sure of the amount of
medical damages/expenses.  The $6k figure seems right to me, but it
has been a while since I read the decision.  And please note the
crossposting.  Should you choose to followup, watch your newsgroup
line.

Patrick "better Nate than lever" Clark
-- 
Patrick S. Clark | "We are not in the Eighth Dimension.
Email is life!   |  We are over New Jersey.  All is not lost."
Usual disclaimer | --Unidentified red Lectroid announcer
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.urban