{"id":52613,"date":"2016-09-30T11:27:00","date_gmt":"2016-09-30T16:27:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/content.findlaw-admin.com\/ability-legal\/supreme\/legal-commentary\/my-big-fat-class-action.html"},"modified":"2016-09-30T11:27:00","modified_gmt":"2016-09-30T16:27:00","slug":"my-big-fat-class-action","status":"publish","type":"supreme","link":"https:\/\/supreme.findlaw.com\/legal-commentary\/my-big-fat-class-action.html","title":{"rendered":"My Big Fat Class Action"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n \n
\n
\n \n \n \n \n \n\n \n \n
<\/a><\/td>\n

My Big Fat Class Action:
Why The Lawsuit Against McDonald’s Is Not a Good Candidate for Class Action Treatment<\/span><\/h1><\/td>\n <\/tr>\n

By BARTON ARONSON<\/h2><\/a><\/td>\n <\/tr>\n

Tuesday, Feb. 25, 2003<\/td>\n\n <\/tr>\n <\/table>\n

Last week, the lawyers in Pelman v. McDonald’s<\/i> filed their amended complaint. The much-publicized lawsuit is their effort to hold McDonald’s responsible for many of the ills of New York State’s children. The suit contends that McDonald’s lies about the content of its food, that children eat too much of it, and that, as a result, those children suffer from obesity and host of attendant illnesses. <\/p>\n \n

The lawsuit, of course, is a class action. That is, the lawyers seek to represent not only the two plaintiffs named in the complaint, but all<\/u> the children in New York who eat too many Big Macs and believe they are unwell as a result.<\/p>\n \n

And just as surely as the lawsuit is a class action, it is not intended merely as a lawsuit, but as an instrument of social policy. Indeed, the lawyers are explicit about this. When they filed their amended complaint, they told CNN, “We are not looking to get rich from a large money settlement. We are proposing a fund that will educate children about the nutritional facts and contents of McDonald’s food.” <\/p>\n \n

Who could possibly object to that?<\/p>\n \n

Unfortunately, it’s not so simple. There is a mismatch between what the plaintiffs say they seek, and what they actually have to prove to get what they seek. And that mismatch is a sure sign that the procedural tool of class action litigation is being misused. <\/p>\n \n

A Short History of The McDonald’s Suit<\/b> <\/p>\n \n

The plaintiffs have sued McDonald’s under New York state law, alleging the common law tort of negligence and violations of state consumer protection laws. The named plaintiffs are both minors who have – like nearly everyone else in America – eaten at McDonald’s.<\/p>\n \n

They claim to have overeaten McDonald’s food because McDonald’s has advertised that its food is healthy when, in fact, it’s not. They also say that McDonald’s was negligent in selling such dangerous stuff. And they claim that as a result of having eaten there, they are overweight and suffering from a variety of related illnesses, including diabetes, heart disease, and high blood pressure. <\/p>\n \n

Every one of their claims requires, as a matter of New York law (and the law of every other state), that the individual suing<\/u> have been harmed by McDonald’s alleged actions. It’s not enough, in other words, for named plaintiff Ashley Pelman to prove that McDonald’s lied about what’s in the Chicken McNuggets. She has to prove that she, Ashley, suffered an injury as a result.<\/p>\n \n

\n