Personal Injury Lawsuit
A woman from suburban Chicago has filed a lawsuit in Cook County Circuit Court seeking more than $600,000 in damages against McDonald's for serving her glass in a spicy McChicken sandwich. She claims to have incurred oral injuries due to the negligence on the part of the famous fast food chain.
Vjollca Lecaj, who filed the lawsuit Friday, alleges that, last summer, on 5 August 2010, she was eating at a southwest suburban McDonald's when she found something extra crunchy in the chicken sandwich, which left her in pain and anguish. She claims that, to her surprise, it was a glass shard that left her with serious, permanent oral injuries.
The Mcdonalds lawsuit complainant says that the staff at Oak Lawn McDonald’s restaurant, 4817 W. 105th St., was at fault, because they failed to ensure that they serve best quality,uncontaminated, and safe food to their customers. She contends that the Oak Lawn McDonald’s staff did not fulfill their duty of inspecting and properly maintaining their cooking equipment to ensure that the food cooked is safe and causes no harm to consumers.
The lawsuit asserts that the glass shards in the sandwich served to the complainant might have scattered due to explosion of an overheated glass coffee pot. The complainant in the 12-count suit seeks damages saying that she sustained severe and permanent injuries to her mouth caused by the glass shards.
In the lawsuit, Lecaj claims product liability and negligence on the part of McDonald’s restaurant in Oak Lawn, McDonald’s USA, LLC., McDonald’s Corporation, and JDD Investment Company. She contends that she had to undergo severe pain in her mouth as a result of the injury caused by unknowingly chewing the glass shard in the chicken burger.
It is indeed a grave negligence to serve glasses in food. If unknowingly somebody chews a piece of glass while eating a burger, it might cause serious injury to the mouth. The piece of glass can cut the tongue or scrap it badly and even chip a tooth or injure the throat. In some cases, fracture in the tooth might show up after a period of six months, which requires a possible root canal. In that case, the patient is required to make frequent visits to the dentist to have their tooth fixed.
In the present case filed by Lecaj, there is every possibility that the court will evoke product liability provisions to the disadvantage of the world-renowned fast food chain. Under the law, the victim is entitled to take legal action and claim compensation in such types of cases involving pain and suffering caused by negligence of the service provider. However, the case requires ample evidence to validate the claim that the food served to them contained a shard of glass. In such cases, the customers must raise their voice then and there itself and report about the lacuna and solitary evidence, such as shard of glass, to the concerned manager or staff in the restaurant. The restaurant’s insurance coverage will cover any unforeseen medical or dental expenses if they agree that the injury was caused on their premises.
The world’s largest fast food chain, McDonald’s has faced a number of lawsuits in its 70-year history. Most of the lawsuits filed sought legal action and financial compensation against McDonald’s for persistent negligence. In most of the cases, the court found McDonald’s violating implied warranties of merchantability and fitness and ordered for compensation to be payable to the victims. There are instances when McDonald’s, in order to retain its corporate image, had made out-of court settlements.
In a similar case, in the past, NYPD cop John Florio filed a lawsuit against McDonald's claiming that the burger served to him contained glass shards, which he unknowingly swallowed. He claimed a compensation of $6 million from McDonalds for negligence. A McDonald's employee admitted that it was his fault, as he'd brought a broken picture
frame and placed the glass shards in the burger served to the police officer.
In the much-talked-about McDonalds coffee case, a 79-year-old woman accused the fast food chain of serving too hot coffee at its drive thru. The plaintiff, in her lawsuit, claimed that the coffee was hotter than required and caused third-degree burn injuries when it spilled on her. While deciding the case under the product liability clause, a U.S. court awarded $2.9 million compensation to the elderly woman. Though the penalty was later reduced to $640,000 on the appeal of the fast food chain, the verdict highlighted the brighter side of product liability laws made to protect consumers.The case also severely dented McDonald’s claim of being a responsible corporate body.
David Scheiding filed a lawsuit against GZK Inc. claiming that they had served him a piece of human flesh in his Arby's chicken sandwich. Investigators later found that it belonged to the restaurant manager, who was shredding lettuce when he cut skin from his thumb.