Woman Slips On Steps, Sues 5-Star Cebu Hotel

[JJReyes]

I suggest that this woman decided to wear an inappropriate pair of shoes - inappropriate for their height, her age and the weather. That coupled with a few glasses of champers would have meant that she was a bit unsteady on her legs.   Case dismissed!

 

Not in the United States. The nuisance value would mean a pay-off $10,000 and the signing of a confidentiality agreement. The property owner and their insurer would consider the amount reasonable compared to the expense of a lawsuit. Not knowing how the jury would react, they could easily give her $300,000. In addition, the property owner and their insurer would have to pay an additonal $300,000 in attorney's fees. 

[Markham]

Had there been any other complaints about the steps? Was Marco Polo trying to cut corners by not correcting known problems? What are ALL the facts?

 

Just playing the devil's advocate. I like Marco Polo.

The "accident" allegedly took place in June but she doesn't (apparently) file a case until October?! I suggest this is a "face" case. This accident caused her some embarrassment, maybe within her social circle and rather than accept and admit that it was a preventable accident for which she was responsible, she has decided to deflect the blame on to the hotel.

 

My wife and I stayed in the Marco Polo for a couple of nights in mid-May and the steps were in the process of being renovated with a new non-slip surface of small sharp stone chippings.

[MikeB]

She better have a lot of patience, the wheels of justice turn slowly in the Philippines. The Court of Appeals just dismissed a p9.2 million lawsuit against the Ayala Mcdonalds 13 years after the incident:

http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/local-news/2013/10/13/ca-exonerates-fastfood-joint-2000-incident-308329

[Call me bubba]

She better have a lot of patience, the wheels of justice turn slowly in the Philippines. The Court of Appeals just dismissed a p9.2 million lawsuit against the Ayala Mcdonalds 13 years after the incident:

http://www.sunstar.com.ph/cebu/local-news/2013/10/13/ca-exonerates-fastfood-joint-2000-incident-308329

yes mike b i saw the same story,  thanks for the post

 

Sunday, October 13, 2013

THE Court of Appeals (CA) threw out the P9-million damage suit that parents

filed against the franchisee of an American fastfood company for allegedly dropping their then eight-month-old son during a birthday party in 2000.

The CA reversed the trial court’s decision that found Cebu Golden Food Industries Inc.,

the operator McDonald’s Ayala Center Cebu, liable for negligence.

Prime responsibility

 

“In the instant case, the evidence and the law indubitably lead us to

no other conclusion than that (mother) Mary Ann Latonio’s negligence is the proximate

and sole cause of the fall and injury of baby Ed Christian,”

read the CA decision penned by Associate Justice Gabriel Ingles.

Ed Christian suffered a fractured skull after he fell while his photograph was being taken with the McDonald’s mascot. 

Ed Dante Latonio and his wife Mary Ann sued Cebu Golden Food and McGeorge Food Industries Inc., the franchise holder.

Also implicated was McDonald’s service crew Tyke Philip Lomibao, who was designated as the mascot.

The Latonios said that their son fell when the fastfood’s mascot failed to hold him during a picture-taking on Sept. 17, 2000. 

The Latonios had sought P9 million as damages and P200,000 as litigation expenses.

McGeorge Food Industries, in its motion, asked the court to dismiss the case because they were not a “party-in-interest” in the lawsuit.

Lomibao, the McDonald’s service crew, had also denied he asked the children to gather for a photo session. 

 

Lower court ruling

 

The mother, he said, never requested him to hold the child.

He said he didn’t expect the mother to leave the child alone with him.

Regional Trial Court Judge Manuel Patalinghug, in his decision dated March 3, 2009,

found Lomibao and Cebu Golden Food liable for “acts of negligence.”

Patalinghug ordered the defendants to pay the couple P950,000 as damages and P300,000 as attorney’s fees. 

The judge also dismissed the case against McGeorge for lack of evidence.

 

The CA, in its decision, said Mary Ann “acted negligently and carelessly.”

“Indeed, it is irresponsible for a mother to entrust the safety, even momentarily, of her eight-month-old child to a mascot...,” the CA said.

While it commiserates with the mental and emotional stress the couple had endured because of the accident, the CA said it is bound to decide cases based on evidence.

“To our mind, what is more accord with human experience

and dictates of reason is that a diligent mother would naturally ensure first the safety of her child before releasing her hold on him,” the CA said.

 

Published in the Sun.Star Cebu newspaper on October 13, 2013.