Published: May 07, 2008 10:49 am            

McDonald’s files motion to dismiss

Claims plaintiffs failed to show how they were actually injured by being served bloodied food

By Samantha Swindler / Managing Editor

Attorneys for the McDonald’s of North Corbin filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against the restaurant, claiming the plaintiffs weren’t actually injured by their alleged experience with a bloodied hamburger and food wrapper.

Plaintiffs Jeffery Jackson, Kendall Jackson, Amber Jackson, Peggy Johnson, Lisa Hughes and Tiffany Hughes claim that on April 6, 2007, a McDonald’s employee injured his hand while he was preparing their food and allowed his blood to contaminate the wrapping, and subsequently their meal.

In response to the lawsuit filed April 5 in Knox Circuit Court, attorneys for McDonald’s of North Corbin, aka Mann Enterprises, and Daniel Brown, the employee who allegedly cut himself, wrote that the plaintiffs had not eaten the food, nor where they exposed to any disease in the process.

“Plaintiffs do not allege that they ate the allegedly contaminated food,” the motion read. “The alleged employee underwent blood tests which were all negative for any communicable disease or illness. Plaintiffs do not assert that they suffered any physical injury anywhere in their complaint.”

Instead, the plaintiffs are seeking damages for “public embarrassment, humiliation, repulsion, anxiety, worry, concern, fear, aggravation and inconvenience by their reluctance and inability to patronize fast food establishments.”

The lawsuit claims McDonald’s violated the Consumer Protection Act, and that under Kentucky Revised Statute 367.220, the plaintiffs deserve recovery of actual damages, reasonable attorney fees and costs, injunctive and other equitable relief and punitive damages.

In their motion, the defense doesn’t confirm or deny the facts of the case, but asks, “if the facts alleged in the complaint can be proved, would the plaintiff be entitled to relief?... Because plaintiffs cannot establish they were physically injured in any way, their list of subjective, anxiety-related, psychological damages are not recoverable even if plaintiffs allegations are taken as true.”

The defense’s motion cites opinions from several previous lawsuits to argue that in this case “damages are too remote and speculative” for an award to be given, and requests the suit be dismissed.

A hearing on the defense’s motion is scheduled for June 6 in Knox Circuit Court.

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.