PS 60 2017
Week 9 Report
Jin, Ji Hyung
Juror Verdict on Liebeck vs. McDonald’s Restaurants
In 1992, Liebeck ordered a coffee in McDonald’s drive through, and she hold the
coffee between her legs because her car didn’t have any cup holder. She spilt the coffee
while she drove the car, and it caused her to get third degree burn and serious injuries. She
had to do surgery and it costed $11,000. Liebeck required McDonald’s to indemnify the
damage, and adjured $20,000. However, McDonald rejected the offer, and made the
counteroffer as McDonald’s would only compensate $800. Liebeck rejected the
Mc’Donald’s counteroffer, and finally this case went to court dispute.
Surprisingly, Jury verdict was that McDonald’s should indemnify Liebeck and give
$2,860,000. However, the court verdict was that McDonald’s compensate Liebeck
$640,000. This case is looked differently based on political orientation. Liberals’
perspectives on this case are that the verdict was rational and a showing of social justice.
On the contrary to Liberals, Republicans’ opinions are that this case was an unfair
judgement.
In order to figure out that there is relativity of whether decision is depending on
major, I classified the students who are majored in Economics and the students who are
going to law school.
Law School
Economics
6 / 13.64%
Nothing
1 / 5.88%
1 / 2.27%
800
0 / 0%
8 / 18.18%
20,000
3 / 17.66%
11 / 25%
225,000
4 / 23.53%
5 / 11.36%
242,500
4 / 23.53%
0 / 0%
660,000
1 / 5.88%
3 / 6.82%
660,900
2 / 11.76%
10 / 22.73%
2.7 million
2 / 11.76%
44 / 100%
17 / 100%
The students who are planning to go to law school and the students who are
majored in economics have no specific feature. Both students are kind of equally
distributed on each section. Both rationales have no visible difference. On the argue that
Liebeck should be compensated with nothing, both rationales from prospective law school
students and economics-major students are that she got hurt due to her negligence, and
McDonald’s had nothing to do with it. Therefore, McDonald’s should not compensate
anything (individual responsibility). In addition, in the section of the argue that McDonald’s
should compensate 2.7 million dollars, both rationales were that coffee was extremely hot
and McDonald’s ignored the customers’ feedbacks so this is McDonald’s fault (social 1 justice).
If I were the prosecutor, I would choose people as a jury who are Liberals,
Democrats, and planning to go to law school. From my class data, 26 out of 182 students
suggested that the case is McDonald’s fault so McDonald should compensate Liebeck 2.7
million dollars, and 21 out of 26 students were Democrats or Independent Liberals. In
addition, 21 out of the 26 students are planning to go to law school. On the other hand, If I
were the defense attorney, I would choose people who are Conservatives, Republicans, and
Men. The number of students who argued that spilling coffee was due to her negligence so
McDonald’s compensate nothing, are 14. Out of the 14 students, 10 students are
Republicans or independent Conservatives. In addition, male students were 11 out of 14
students. Although 13 out of the 14 students were non-economics major, economic major is
nothing related to and greatly contribute to personal decision because the students who
suggested that Liebeck should be compensated with 2.7 million dollars, are also not
economic majors. There were only two students who are economic majors out of 24
students in the section. Therefore, although major only a little influences personal view on
the case, but the main factors that influences personal decision are a political orientation
and gender.
From the class data, the students who are the Prosecution side score more game
points than the students who are the Defense side. The sum of the Prosecution side game
points is 900, and the sum of Defense side game points is -200. One of the reasons that the
Democrat side lose is that there are much Democrats or Liberal students than Republicans
or Conservatives in the class where it belongs in Democrats majority state. Also, this class
has women majority. Since the game is greatly influenced by players’ political orientation
and gender difference, the Prosecution side is more advantageous than the Defender side
because there are much more Democrats and women in the class—male students 58, female
students 112.
In the Competitive Jury Selection Game, students had a choice of delegating jury
selection to a Jury Consultant. I think that it was not a rational choice because the students
who did well in the Basic Jury Selection Game did not choose to delegate a jury consultant,
and other students who did poorly in the selection Game delegated a jury consultant, but it
led them to get minus points on the jury selection game. According to the article “The
Utility of Scientific Jury Selection: Still Murky After 30 Years.”, “empirical correlations
between standard demographic characteristic and juror verdict inclinations are near-zero.”
In other words, there is nothing related between demographic characteristic and juror
verdict. Based on the close look at the data on four jury cases, I can conclude that the main
factor that influences jury decision is jury’s political orientation. 2 3

• 1497413274-PS 60 Week9 Report.docx

SuperTutor

(15)

Status NEW Posted 14 Jun 2017 04:06 AM My Price 20.00

-----------

Attachments

file 1497413278-Solutions file.docx preview (51 words )

S-----------olu-----------tio-----------ns -----------fil-----------e -----------Hel-----------lo -----------Sir-----------/Ma-----------dam----------- T-----------han-----------k y-----------ou -----------for----------- yo-----------ur -----------int-----------ere-----------st -----------and----------- bu-----------yin-----------g m-----------y p-----------ost-----------ed -----------sol-----------uti-----------on.----------- Pl-----------eas-----------e p-----------ing----------- me----------- on----------- ch-----------at -----------I a-----------m o-----------nli-----------ne -----------or -----------inb-----------ox -----------me -----------a m-----------ess-----------age----------- I -----------wil-----------l b-----------e q-----------uic-----------kly----------- on-----------lin-----------e a-----------nd -----------giv-----------e y-----------ou -----------exa-----------ct -----------fil-----------e a-----------nd -----------the----------- sa-----------me -----------fil-----------e i-----------s a-----------lso----------- se-----------nt -----------to -----------you-----------r e-----------mai-----------l t-----------hat----------- is----------- re-----------gis-----------ter-----------ed -----------on�-----------�th-----------is -----------web-----------sit-----------e -----------Tha-----------nk -----------you----------- -----------

Not Rated(0)

• Buy Answer