You said, in part: Doesn't matter if they asked the 17 y/o behind the counter or the CEO. In our Anglo-American common law system, a company is responsible for the actions of its employees if those actions are done while on the job and as part of the job.
***
You are correct, of course. The issue here is whether it is part of the job description of the counter help to advise what the ingredients in the cooking oil used by McDonald's are. I am not sure that it is part of that job.
You have a point.
They will lose. Due diligence on the part of the parents is not satisified by simply asking a sever to validate the absense of a threat to their minor child's welfare, and the parents already knew this, as well, unless they are retarded.
This is another ham & egger looking for a quick pay out from deep pockets
I could break this down in one minute.
So will Micky D.
I would think the people in the best position to avoid harm are the parents of the child, who can certainly prepare food safe for their child without having to rely on the chemistry expertise of a fast-food monkey.
I hope the judgment they receive will assuage the pain of their loss.
Spoken like someone with a lawsuit.
If you ask the janitor in a hospital for medical advice, and it proves wrong - can you sue the hospital?
Any idiot who thinks the server at a McD's knows anything other than how to 'supersize' deserves any reactions they get.