“Ladies and gentlemen, they want a lot of money for this, a lot of money.  What’s been written on the board is called a per diem analysis . . . how many days has it been since the accident?  How many days for the rest of his life.  And how much per day is that worth?  That’s what’s been done here.  That’s how we get verdicts like in the McDonald’s case with a cup of coffee.” Although the Boyle’s attorney objected to the remark, the trial judge allowed it and the couple was awarded $62,500.00 in damages, when they had asked for $458,000.00 Chief Justice Kristine Durham, writing the opinion on behalf of the Utah Supreme Court, noted “the cultural context of the McDonald’s lawsuit” and indicated that it had been mocked on late night shows and parodied on “Seinfeld”, and that the McDonald’s was generally misunderstood by the public. Time and time again insurance companies, defense attorneys, and related representatives point to the McDonald’s case as an example of frivolous lawsuits and runaway jury verdicts.  The Utah Supreme Court ordered a new trial for the Boyles. Although the original McDonald’s verdict was $2.7 million, it was reduced on appeal to approximately $650,000.00 based upon significant evidence showing McDonald’s disregard for the safety of its customers.]]>