Bk vs Nadel

In: Social Issues

Submitted By meetshah92
Words 5512
Pages 23
Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton County.
NADEL et al., Appellants, v. BURGER KING CORPORATION et al., Appellees.
No. C-960489.
-- May 21, 1997
Edward J. Felson and Stephen R. Felson, Cincinnati, for appellants. Jonathan P. Saxton, Cincinnati, for appellee Burger King Corporation. Droder & Miller Co., L.P.A., A. Dennis Miller and Kevin J. Ryan, Cincinnati, for appellee Emil, Inc.
I. Facts
On a morning in early December 1993, plaintiff-appellant Paul Nadel was driving his son, plaintiff-appellant Christopher, and two younger daughters, Ashley and Brittany, to school.1 Paul's mother, plaintiff-appellant Evelyn Nadel, was seated next to the passenger window. Christopher was seated in the front seat between Evelyn and Paul, with one foot on the transmission hump and one foot on the passenger side of the hump. Brittany and Ashley were in the back seat. On the way, they ordered breakfast from the drive-through window of a Burger King restaurant owned and operated by defendant-appellee Emil, Inc. (“Emil”) under a franchise agreement with defendant-appellee Burger King Corporation (“BK”). Paul's order included several breakfast sandwiches and drinks and two cups of coffee. The cups of coffee were fitted with lids and served in a cardboard container designed to hold four cups, with the two cups placed on opposite diagonal corners. Emil's employee served the coffee through the car window to Paul, who passed it to Christopher, who handed it to Evelyn. Evelyn testified that she tasted the coffee in the cup on the right side of the container, by raising the flap on its lid, and found it too hot to drink. She also testified that the lid of the coffee “jiggled off” and burned her on her right leg after she lifted the flap. After bending the flap of the lid so that it was closed, Evelyn returned the cup, covered by the lid, to the…...

Similar Documents

Unix vs Ms vs Mac

...Running head: UNIX vs. MS vs. MAC 1 CIS-155 Final - UNIX vs. MS vs. MAC UNIX vs. MS vs. MAC 2 Abstract This paper will explore the history of UNIX, Microsoft (MS), and Macintosh (MAC) operating systems. Not only will I discuss the history of these systems, but I will also dive into the pros and cons of each. The benefits of each over its rivals will also be discussed. Keywords: open source, UNIX, Windows, UNIX vs. MS vs. MAC 3 The topic of what operating system is best has been a long and heated one. But, in the long run, UNIX will beat its rivals in most categories hands down. As the reader will see throughout this paper, undisputed evidence will be presented that will detail exactly how UNIX based operating systems are superior. Operating systems (OS‘s) are a means for users to communicate with the computer. Each OS provides a set of commands for directing the operation of the computer. Without these operating systems to help as interfaces, each user would have to learn the command syntax, which can be very difficult. These operating systems can be menu-driven, which provides a set of menus and lets users choose desired functions from then, or they can be icon-driven, known as a graphical user interface (GUI). GUIs are very common these days and with them, users can choose an icon, usually with a mouse, to......

Words: 1794 - Pages: 8

Iphone vs Android

...IPhone VS Andoid IPhone and Android Phones are two of the top phones in the market in the present time. While both phones offer great features, the programs and running software make each of the phone unique to each individual person. It is really more of a preference for each person. There are many great features on each phone. The programing which each phones system runs under is very different. The OS internal system of stacks is called the Kernel. Android which was developed under Google software uses the Google used the Linux version 2.6 OS to build Android's kernel, this also includes Android's memory management programs. Now IPhone OS is a mobile operating system developed and marketed by Apple Inc. It is the default operating system of the IPhone. It is a UNIX like OS that is derived from Mac OS X. It is hard to say who would have the overall advantage in this case because both networks are strong. With one’s personal experience testing the Android Google market, most of the Applications did not work as well as the ones for the IPhones. Most of those third party builders did not have the slightest idea on how to make a successful application. An example of a third party program downloaded and tested was an MP3 music downloader. It downloaded a few songs and they stayed on the phone for a couple of days. Then an update came along with it and they would wipe all music out that had been downloaded. More than likely it was due to not being on a legal stand point to......

Words: 1266 - Pages: 6

Nadel vs Burger King

...assignment, you will need to access the LexisNexis database in the Keller Library, from the Student Resources area under Course Home. Go to Kubasek, Chapter 13, page 369, problem 13-16. Use LexisNexis in the Keller library and look up the Nadel et al. v. Burger King Corp. & Emil, Inc. case. Use the citation you find in your book to do the search. Read the case and answer these questions. Copy and paste this information into a Word document, include your name on that document, and answer the questions. 1. What must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgement? (3 points) The plaintiff must prove that • 1. the product was defective when sold; • 2. the defective condition rendered the product unreasonably dangerous; and • 3. the product was the cause of the plaintiff’s injury. The defect is usually the most difficult part of the case for the plaintiff to establish. A product may be defective because of (1) some flaw or abnormality in its construction or marketing that led to its being more dangerous than it otherwise would have been, (2) a failure by the manufacturer or seller to adequately warn of a risk or hazard associated with the product, or (3) a design that is defective. ( Source : Kubasek) The Nadels could raise several claims, including (1) breach of a warranty of merchantability and breach of a warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, both based on the allegation that the coffee was too hot to consume, (2) products......

Words: 1556 - Pages: 7

Nadel V Burgerking

...you will need to access the LexisNexis database in the Keller Library, from the Student Resources area under Course Home. Go to Kubasek, Chapter 13, page 369, problem 13-16. Use LexisNexis in the Keller library and look up the Nadel et al. v. Burger King Corp. & Emil, Inc. case. Use the citation you find in your book to do the search. Read the case and answer these questions. Copy and paste this information into a Word document, include your name on that document, and answer the questions. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points) According to the case, what must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points) Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress, and what tort did the court approve? (5 points) According to the case, why didn't the court approve summary judgment for product liability claims? (5 points) Do you agree with this decision? Why or why not? (5 points) Now, in the library, click the “Shepardize” button in the top right of the LexisNexis page while on the case. This provides you with all of the cases which have used Nadel et al. v. Burger King Corp. & Emil, Inc. case as “precedent” since its publication. Out of the cases listed, pick one, click the link, read the case, and provide the following information: the name and citation of the......

Words: 422 - Pages: 2

Bk-Distributors Harvey.

...size. The key driver of the ROI analysis was the market penetration assumption. The allocation of Upfront vs. Ongoing Costs would also affect the IRR value. Finally, the decision horizon also plays an important role in the sensitivity of the IRR, since some of the benefits are long-run benefits. If any of these factors are adjusted, the IRR could become unacceptable. Analysis: • B&K Distributors was a $100 million dollar distributor of paper and packing products based in Chicago, Illinois. • B&K signed a preferred supplier agreement with a leading fast food restaurant chain, but the company was unable to significantly penetrate the market any further. • B&K classified their customers into “A”, “B”, and “C” tiers. Getting customers to “A” or even “B” status would significantly enhance their revenue and profitability prospects. • Currently, a sales order can be received in one of three ways: by phone, fax, or mail. • On-Going support costs of the web portal: ▪ Web Hosting Costs ▪ Campaign Continuance Costs ▪ Additional Consulting Costs - The ROI Analysis concluded an Internal Rate of Return (IRR) of 40.61%. - The estimated ROI is most sensitive to the market penetration assumption. The estimated ROI is also sensitive to the decision horizon of short vs. long-run costs/benefits. Other assumptions that could affect the estimated ROI include the growth in......

Words: 457 - Pages: 2

Nadel V. Burger King

...prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points) a. In the case of Nadel et at v. Burger King Corp. & Emil Inc., “the trial court granted the motions of both defendants for summary judgment”. 3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) b. The facts of this case are that Christopher Nadel suffered from second degree burns to his right foot after being burned by hot coffee ordered from a Burkger King drive-thru. Christopher was seated in middle front seat between his father, Paul and Grandmother, Evelyn. Evelyn received a burn to her right leg when tasting her coffee and it was too hot. Christopher’s second degree burns resulted when Evelyn was placing her coffee down and Paul pulled into the street. On behalf of Christopher, the Nadels sued the owner of Burger King for product liability and failure to display hot warning labels. The owner of Burger King and Burger King Corp. moved for summary judgment which the trial court granted. Burger King stated they were immune to product liability because they aren’t the manufacturer, seller, or supplier of the faulty cups. 4. According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress, and what tort did the court approve? (5 points) c. This is not a negligent infliction of emotional distress case because Burger King (1) did not burn the Nadels intentionally or recklessly. (2) Burger King’s conduct was not ......

Words: 332 - Pages: 2

Nadel Et Al V Burger King Corp

...Carmelita Cain MGMT 520 Week 3 Assignment Nadel et al. v. Burger King Corp. & Emil, Inc. case 1. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points) COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, HAMILTON COUNTY 2. According to the case, what must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points) Emil moved for summary judgment, claiming that no genuine issue of material fact existed. BK also moved for summary judgment and pointed to evidence in the depositions that appellants knew the coffee was hot and that coffee was purchased and served as a hot beverage. It also contended under the circumstances that Evelyn's and Paul's actions were intervening, superseding causes precluding any actionable negligence on its part. 3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) Christopher Nadel received second degree burns from coffee spilling on his right foot purchased at Burger King by his grandmother Evelyn Nadel. The Nadel’s brought suit against Burger King and franchise owner Emil, Inc, for product liability for a defectively designed product and for failure to warn of the dangers of handling a liquid served as hot as their coffee. The court granted both the Burger King owner and Burger King Corporation request for motion of summary of judgments. The Nadel’s appealed. The court affirmed in part and reversed in part. The summary judgment was wrongly granted on...

Words: 1465 - Pages: 6

Mac vs Microsoft vs

...for the process. Each task also holds the execution state, which can be running, interruptible, uninterruptible, stopped, zombie. Linux takes the user level threads for the tasks and can map them to kernel level processes with the same group ID. This offers resources sharing and security. Mac operating systems handle the execution of processes even differently than Windows and Linux. Mac has Grand Central Dispatch, which contains a pool of available threads. “Thread pools are automatically sized by the system to maximize the performance of the applications using GCD while minimizing the number of idle or competing threads” (Stallings 2012). Programs are intended to create blocks, which contain data and code on how to perform. “Windows vs. MAC vs. Linux OS will provide as much concurrency as possible based on the number of cores available and the thread capacity of the system” (Stallings, 2012). The development of these blocks is formatted in files and will run in concurrency using first-in-first-out processing. The merging process in the Grand Central Dispatch is well-organized in most cases compared to manually handling threads. Looking at UNIX/Linux it has one advantage over other operating systems on the market. It is less used than other operating systems. That fact alone improves the security of the operating system because the less hackers are trying to attack the system, the more secure it will be. Linux utilizes a firewall to block anyone trying to hack into the......

Words: 2337 - Pages: 10

Nadel V. Burger King

...prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points) a. In the case of Nadel et at v. Burger King Corp. & Emil Inc., “the trial court granted the motions of both defendants for summary judgment”. 3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) b. The facts of this case are that Christopher Nadel suffered from second degree burns to his right foot after being burned by hot coffee ordered from a Burkger King drive-thru. Christopher was seated in middle front seat between his father, Paul and Grandmother, Evelyn. Evelyn received a burn to her right leg when tasting her coffee and it was too hot. Christopher’s second degree burns resulted when Evelyn was placing her coffee down and Paul pulled into the street. On behalf of Christopher, the Nadels sued the owner of Burger King for product liability and failure to display hot warning labels. The owner of Burger King and Burger King Corp. moved for summary judgment which the trial court granted. Burger King stated they were immune to product liability because they aren’t the manufacturer, seller, or supplier of the faulty cups. 4. According to the case, why was this not a case of negligent infliction of emotional distress, and what tort did the court approve? (5 points) c. This is not a negligent infliction of emotional distress case because Burger King (1) did not burn the Nadels intentionally or recklessly. (2) Burger King’s conduct was not ......

Words: 332 - Pages: 2

Bk - Tim Hortons

...relationships, community support and fresh coffee." - Marc Caira, President and CEO of Tim Hortons Burger king – KING OF HAMBURGERS Burger King, often abbreviated as BK, is a global chain of hamburger fast food restaurants headquartered in unincorporated Miami-Dade County, Florida, United States. The company began in 1953 as Insta-Burger King, a Jacksonville, Florida-based restaurant chain. After Insta-Burger King ran into financial difficulties in 1954, its two Miami-based franchisees, David Edgerton and James McLamore, purchased the company and renamed it Burger King. Over the next half century, the company would change hands four times, with its third set of owners, a partnership of TPG Capital, Bain Capital, and Goldman Sachs Capital Partners, taking it public in 2002. In late 2010, 3G Capital of Brazil acquired a majority stake in BK in a deal valued at US$3.26 billion. The new owners promptly initiated a restructuring of the company to reverse its fortunes. 3G, along with partner Berkshire Hathaway. At the end of fiscal year 2013, Burger King reported it had over 13,000 outlets in 79 countries; of these, 66 percent are in the United States and 99 percent are privately owned and operated with its new owners moving to an entirely franchised model in 2013. BK has historically used several variations of franchising to expand its operations. The manner in which the company licenses its franchisees varies depending on the......

Words: 8858 - Pages: 36

Bk - Tim Hortons

... community support and fresh coffee." - Marc Caira, President and CEO of Tim Hortons Burger king – KING OF HAMBURGERS Burger King, often abbreviated as BK, is a global chain of hamburger fast food restaurants headquartered in unincorporated Miami-Dade County, Florida, United States. The company began in 1953 as Insta-Burger King, a Jacksonville, Florida-based restaurant chain. After Insta-Burger King ran into financial difficulties in 1954, its two Miami-based franchisees, David Edgerton and James McLamore, purchased the company and renamed it Burger King. Over the next half century, the company would change hands four times, with its third set of owners, a partnership of TPG Capital, Bain Capital, and Goldman Sachs Capital Partners, taking it public in 2002. In late 2010, 3G Capital of Brazil acquired a majority stake in BK in a deal valued at US$3.26 billion. The new owners promptly initiated a restructuring of the company to reverse its fortunes. 3G, along with partner Berkshire Hathaway. At the end of fiscal year 2013, Burger King reported it had over 13,000 outlets in 79 countries; of these, 66 percent are in the United States and 99 percent are privately owned and operated with its new owners moving to an entirely franchised model in 2013. BK has historically used several variations of franchising to expand its operations. The manner in which the company licenses its franchisees......

Words: 8858 - Pages: 36

Nadel Et Al., Appellants, V. Burger King Corporation

...Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton County. NADEL et al., Appellants, v. BURGER KING CORPORATION et al., Appellees. No. C-960489. -- May 21, 1997 Edward J. Felson and Stephen R. Felson, Cincinnati, for appellants. Jonathan P. Saxton, Cincinnati, for appellee Burger King Corporation. Droder & Miller Co., L.P.A., A. Dennis Miller and Kevin J. Ryan, Cincinnati, for appellee Emil, Inc. I. Facts On a morning in early December 1993, plaintiff-appellant Paul Nadel was driving his son, plaintiff-appellant Christopher, and two younger daughters, Ashley and Brittany, to school.1  Paul's mother, plaintiff-appellant Evelyn Nadel, was seated next to the passenger window.   Christopher was seated in the front seat between Evelyn and Paul, with one foot on the transmission hump and one foot on the passenger side of the hump.   Brittany and Ashley were in the back seat.   On the way, they ordered breakfast from the drive-through window of a Burger King restaurant owned and operated by defendant-appellee Emil, Inc. (“Emil”) under a franchise agreement with defendant-appellee Burger King Corporation (“BK”).   Paul's order included several breakfast sandwiches and drinks and two cups of coffee.   The cups of coffee were fitted with lids and served in a cardboard container designed to hold four cups, with the two cups placed on opposite diagonal corners.   Emil's employee served the coffee through the car window to Paul, who passed it to Christopher, who handed it to......

Words: 5512 - Pages: 23

Bk Ad

...Sexual Connotation in the BK Ad Andrea Farias Sheridan College Over the course of many years, advertising agencies have been using various methods to advertise their products. Such methods can include repetition, claims, association, following what others do or even promotions. An advertisement agency in Singapore produced a Burger King ad that has a sexual connotation; the new “BK Super Seven Incher”. Burger King was always facing fierce competition with McDonald’s. This pushed Burger King to be desperate about their promotion of the new product in Singapore. However the use of the context for the advertisement has made it ineffective. It is quite clear that the new “BK Super Seven Incher” has used sexual connotation. Using the facial expression of the woman having her mouth agape, the use of a seven inch sandwich and the words “IT’LL BLOW YOUR MIND AWAY” create a fellatio connotation. This use of association does not appeal to the general audience. For the advertisement to be successful, it should not only appeal to hormonal teenagers and men, but to others. Parents with young children would most likely stray away from buying this product. Furthermore, it is a well-known fact that the eastern mindset is much less liberal with their sexuality. Consequently, Burger King risks having family oriented customers boycott their restaurant. The ad is neither family oriented nor friendly, and the sandwich does not look anything close to healthy. Another audience that this......

Words: 598 - Pages: 3

Bk vs Mcd

...Professor Gordon Course 1101 17 June 2009 Contrast Essay For many years’ fast food restaurants has been the number one stop for a quick bite to eat for individuals in America. With the convenience of pulling into a drive-thru and ordering a meal without having to waste time getting out of the car, is great for people; they love to stop at a fast food restaurant. Also a lot of fast food chains are open late, people get to grab a meal even after a night out and the restaurants gets the business of those individuals who are looking for food at midnight. Moreover there is a lot of same kind of fast food places that serve hamburgers and fries; therefore, there is a large amount competition within them. Two of the most known fast food chains are McDonald’s and Burger King even though they both serve the same type of foods yet there are differences between them both which people are not aware of. There menu, mascots, and community involvement vary in these two chains. Introducing McDonald’s Big Mac and Burger King’s Whopper. Both are signature products at each restaurant. The two have an extremely different taste for being just an ordinary hamburger. One may prefer a Whopper over a Big Mac when looking for something less greasy. A Whopper consist of a grilled quarter-pound beef patty in a sesame seed hamburger bun with the common condiments of ketchup, mayonnaise, lettuce, tomatoes, pickles, and onions. On the other hand a Big Mac hamburger consist of two beef patties,......

Words: 938 - Pages: 4

Nadel vs Bk

...Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton County. NADEL et al., Appellants, v. BURGER KING CORPORATION et al., Appellees. No. C-960489. -- May 21, 1997 Edward J. Felson and Stephen R. Felson, Cincinnati, for appellants. Jonathan P. Saxton, Cincinnati, for appellee Burger King Corporation. Droder & Miller Co., L.P.A., A. Dennis Miller and Kevin J. Ryan, Cincinnati, for appellee Emil, Inc. I. Facts On a morning in early December 1993, plaintiff-appellant Paul Nadel was driving his son, plaintiff-appellant Christopher, and two younger daughters, Ashley and Brittany, to school.1  Paul's mother, plaintiff-appellant Evelyn Nadel, was seated next to the passenger window.   Christopher was seated in the front seat between Evelyn and Paul, with one foot on the transmission hump and one foot on the passenger side of the hump.   Brittany and Ashley were in the back seat.   On the way, they ordered breakfast from the drive-through window of a Burger King restaurant owned and operated by defendant-appellee Emil, Inc. (“Emil”) under a franchise agreement with defendant-appellee Burger King Corporation (“BK”).   Paul's order included several breakfast sandwiches and drinks and two cups of coffee.   The cups of coffee were fitted with lids and served in a cardboard container designed to hold four cups, with the two cups placed on opposite diagonal corners.   Emil's employee served the coffee through the car window to Paul, who passed it to Christopher, who handed it to Evelyn...

Words: 5506 - Pages: 23