Reference no: EM133197208

Case: The expectation for the discussion posts will be that each student will answer the questions provided each week in 1) an original post of a minimum of 250 words answering the prompted questions utilizing the materials provided and any other sources that the student may find, which will be cited appropriately and 2) a response to one other student's post during the period of time in which there is a substantive engagement with the posts. Comments such as "I agree" would not be considered substantive engagement with the original post.

Though this is an online class, participation is still crucial. "Participation" involves reading the assignments thoroughly, reading any handouts provided for the week, watching all videos (including update videos I add throughout the semester), contributing to class discussions, and completing online assignments. To be successful in this class, you should be checking your student email daily and logging in to our course at least 3 times a week.

(Discussion Posts - 6 ) discussion . These will be practical applications of the materials learned during each week. A longer explanation of the expectations of the discussion posts is listed above under Class ProtocolMost

1 The first discussion people are generally aware of the infamous "McDonald's coffee lawsuit," as it has been a popular source of derision, comic fodder, and also the impetus for tort reform across the country in an attempt to limit the liability for so-called "frivolous lawsuits." However, until recently, little attention has been paid to the actual factual basis for the lawsuit, the claims made by the victim Stella Liebeck and what the courts decided in that case. For this week I want you to listen to the following episode of the podcast Swindled, which discusses the case, what happened, the legal arguments and the aftermath. Once you have listened I want you to answer the following questions:

Question 1: The important issue in any case involving a Tort is what is the legal duty owed to the other party. What did Stella Liebeck argue was McDonald's legal duty to its customers and in what way(s) did they breach it?

Question 2: What lessons can businesses draw from how McDonald's acted prior to being sued, and their response to the lawsuit itself? If this case were to occur today, in what ways, if any would the public response change for the better or worse?