Tag: McDonald’s

Man Arrested In Connection With McDonald’s Arson in 2003

New Jersey resident Chris McIntosh, 22, was arrested this month and charged with setting a fire Jan. 20, 2003 that caused about $5,000 in damage to a Seattle-area McDonald’s.

Shortly after the McDonald’s arson, someone called a crime tip line claiming the arson in the name of the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front. The caller said,

There was an E-L-F-A-L-F hit at McDonald’s across from the Space Needle. There will be more. The fire was set on the ‘M.’ Four gallons of gas. There was a broken lock, not cut. Broken. There will be more. As long as Mother Earth is pillaged, raped, destroyed. As long as McDonald’s keeps hurting our furry brothers, there will be more.

Prosecutors say that fingerprints and DNA evidence found on a can of spray paint and sunglasses left at the scene of the crime match McIntosh’s. McIntosh had been arrested numerous times before in several states including Oregon, California, Wisconsin and Illinois, and his name turned up quickly after the FBI ran his prints through their criminal database.

McIntosh’s former girlfriend, Maria Gardner, told police that McIntosh set that fire and that she acted as a lookout during the fire. Another woman he dated, but who is unnamed in the affidavit against him, told the FBI that McIntosh bragged about the McDonald’s fire to her in February 2005.

Additionally, McIntosh apparently used his brother David’s name as an alias, and a Seattle-area youth centers’ records show a “David McIntosh” stayed at the center in January 2003, including the period during which the fire was set (McIntosh, in fact, was using “David McIntosh” as an alias when he was arrested).

McIntosh was arrested in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, after police there received a tip that he may have been in the area. He will be brought to Seattle by federal authorities, and if he is ultimately convicted, he could face up to five years in jail and a $250,000 fine.

The full text of the affidavit filed against McIntosh can be read here.

Sources:

McDonald’s blaze suspect held. Christine Frey, Seattle Post-Intelligencer, February 17, 2005.

New Jersey Man Arrested In 2003 Arson At Seattle Mcdonald’s Restaurant. Press Release, United States Attorney’s Office Western District of Washington, February 16, 2005.

Man charged with arson in 2003 fire. Danielle Camilli, Burlington County Times, February 18, 2005

ALF Damages McDonald’s, KFC in Torrance, California

Animal Liberation Front extremists vandalized a McDonald’s and KFC restaurant in Torrance, California, early February 6.

Police responding to a burglar alarm at the McDonald’s found windows at the restaurant smashed and the words “McMurder Killers” and “ALF” painted on a window.

A KFC near the McDonald’s also had its windows damaged.

Sources:

Vandals strike a Torrance McDonald’s. Doug Irving, The Daily Breeze, February 8, 2005.

ALF Continues South Bay Campaign Against Fast-Food Giants; Torrance McDonald’s Struck Twice in Week’s Time. Press Release, North American Animal Liberation Press Office, February 14, 2005.

McDonald’s Restaurant in Torrance, CA Latest Target of ALF. Press Release, North American Animal Liberation Press Office, February 7, 2005.

Americans Show Little, If Any, Let Up In Beef Eating

So far there doesn’t seem to have been any appreciable rush by people in the United States to abandon beef in the wake of the discovery of a cow with Mad Cow Disease in Washington State.

A January poll conducted by IPSOS U.S. Express for the American Farm Bureau Federation found that 74 percent of Americans said their beef consumption was about the same as it was before the Dec. 23 announcement of the infected cow.

Fifteen percent said their consumption of beef was down slightly or significantly, while 7 percent said their consumption of beef was up slightly or significantly. Four percent of respondents either did not eat beef or said they did not know whether their consumption of beef had increased, decreased or remained about the same.

Certainly fast food restaurants like McDonald’s were unfazed by the announcement. Sales at McDonald’s increased 12.2 percent in December — the ninth month in a row of increased sales for the fast food chain that had experienced slow growth the past couple years.

Source:

Poll: U.S. Still Eating Beef Despite Mad Cow Case. Reuters, January 12, 2004.

McDonald’s posts strong year-end sales. Dave Carpenter, Associated Press, January 27, 2004.

Vegetarians to Appeal Disbursement of McDonald's Settlement

On June 18, 2003, a lawyer represent vegetarians who opposed the final makeup of a settlement agreement with McDonald’s filed a lawsuit to prevent “non-vegetarian” groups from receiving money from that settlement.

Chicago law firm Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein released the following press release announcing the decision to appeal the final disbursement arrangements,

Chicago Law Firm Representing Prominent Members of Vegetarian Community Appeals Disbursement of $6 million in settlement funds in McDonald’s French Fry Case

CHICAGO, June 18, 2003 (PRIMEZONE) — Michael B. Hyman, principal with Chicago law firm Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C., announced today that several prominent members of the vegetarian community filed a notice of appeal on Monday related to a suit against fast food giant McDonald’s (NYSE:MCD). At issue in the appeal is a recent court ruling that allows the allocation of $6 million in settlement funds to be directed to groups which do not uphold the values of vegetarianism, as required by the settlement agreement. The suit attacked McDonald’s use of beef by-products in the preparation of McDonald’s French fries and hash browns.

These prominent members of the vegetarian community (appellants) are not appealing the settlement itself, but assert that the $6 million distribution subverts the spirit and the letter of the settlement agreement by improperly directing funds to non-vegetarian groups, groups hostile to vegetarianism and groups in limited size and geographical reach. A “vegetarian” is a person who does not eat meat, fish, foul or any food derived from the flesh of animals.

“This distribution is like getting a Happy Meal without the food,” Hyman said. “The settlement, on its face, seems to be fair to the vegetarian community, but you open up the box and what you’re expecting just isn’t there.”

The distribution of attorney’s fees to plaintiffs’ lawyers is also being appealed.

It is expected that the appeal could take more than two years to be argued and a decision rendered.

About Much Shelist and Michael B. Hyman

Much Shelist is a Chicago law firm of 90 lawyers established in 1970 with a national business and litigation practice. Michael B. Hyman, a principal in the firm, has a practice that concentrates in contingent matters and consumer, antitrust and securities litigation. On behalf of consumers, the firm has litigated high-profile class actions involving infant formula, frequent flyer miles, auto repairs, tires, seatbelts, tax-preparation services, billing for medical testing, drought insurance, and telephone services, among others. Mr. Hyman is one of the foremost class action practitioners in the United States and has been one of the lead attorneys in lawsuits against State Farm Insurance, H.& R. Block, American Airlines, and Prudential Insurance.

CONTACT:
Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C.
Jay Dinwoodie, Marketing Manager
(312) 521-2122
[email protected]

Source:

Chicago Law Firm Representing Prominent Members of Vegetarian Community Appeals Disbursement of $6 million in settlement funds in McDonald’s French Fry Case. Press Release, Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, Juen 18, 2003.

Judge Rules on Final Makeup of McDonald's Settlement

Cook County Circuit Judge Richard Siebel ruled in late May that 24 groups would divide a $10 million McDonald’s settlement. The settlement was agreed to by McDonald’s to settle lawsuits that it used a beef extract for the flavoring in its french fries after telling consumers that the french fries were vegetarian.

In April, Siebel removed The National Ramah Commission, Arya Pratinidhi Sabha America, and The Department of Nutrition at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill from the original list of 26 groups due to conflicts of interest with each of those groups. In his final ruling Siebel added the Hillel Jewish campus organization to the settlement.

McDona’ds attorney Peter Hecker was pleased with the ruling, but Jeff Nelson and other opponents of the settlement were left steaming mad. Nelson and others are angered that some of the settlement monies will go to groups that are not sufficiently vegetarian.

In a commentary on the decision, Nelson wrote,

As part of the settlement McDonald’s issued an apology and promised to donate $6 million to “vegetarian organizations” that are “dedicat[ed]” to the “values” of
“vegetarianism.” Instead, working in league with plaintiff attorneys who were supposed to represent vegetarians, McDonald’s made recommendations that much of the settlement money should go to non-vegetarian groups, or to groups which are in fact hostile to vegetarianism.

In documents filed last week in the case, McDonald’s and plaintiff attorneys argued to the court that many vegetarians “eat fish and fowl.” They argued that for the purpose of giving away settlement money, a “vegetarian organization” could be an organization that promotes meat and has a longstanding financial relationship with McDonald’s, so long as that organization promised to use settlement money to “benefit vegetarians.”

. . .

Many in the vegetarian community are outraged that McDonald’s (in league with plaintiff lawyers, who seem to be more eager to collect huge legal fees than properly represent their clients) has succeeded in duping the judge into believing non-veg groups are veg ones.

Of course Nelson conveniently forgets that many animal rights groups lump meat eaters in along with true vegetarians when it fits their propaganda purposes. PETA, for example, routinely maintains that there are about 10 million vegetarians in the United States. That figure is based on a poll conducted by Time Magazine. The problem, of course, is that 6 million of those “vegetarians” in fact had eaten meat, poultry or seafood in the previous 24 hours.

Other groups often included much higher inflated figures that also included “vegetarians” who are really meat eaters. So if PETA and others are willing to include meat eaters in their classification of vegetarians, why shouldn’t a Circuit Court Judge do so as well?

Nelson concludes his article, however, by suggesting that further litigation is in the offing, writing that, “It seems likely that vegetarians concerned about justice will appeal this verdict, and at a minimum make a final effort to stop McDonald’s from once again defrauding the vegetarian community.”

Hey, don’t let us stop you from enriching your lawyers.

Sources:

Ten groups to split settlement. Associated Press, May 2003.

McDonald’s Case: Final Chapter? Jeff Nelson, VegSource.Com, May 22, 2003.

McDonald's Judge Ignores Animal Rights Concerns, Strikes Three Groups from Settlement

Circuit Court Judge Richard Siebel ruled in March on requests to disqualify certain groups from the proposed settlement of a lawsuit brought by vegans and vegetarians against McDonald’s over beef flavoring used in its fries.

Animal rights and vegetarian groups complained that some of the 26 groups slated to receive funds from the settlement were anti-vegetarian groups and as such did not deserve to receive any share of the award.

Judge Siebel ignored those complaints, but did disqualify three organizations based on potential conflicts of interest. These were,

  • The National Ramah Commission — a Jewish organization that was disqualified because one of McDonald’s attorneys serves on its board
  • Arya Pratinidhi Sabha America — a Hindu organization disqualified because the mother of two of the plaintiffs’ lawyers and the son of another are involved with the group
  • The Department of Nutrition at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill — disqualified because the daughter of one of the lawyers attends the university

The attorneys in the case must now decide whether to ask that the money that would have went to these groups go to different groups or whether, instead, the awards to the remaining 23 groups be increased.

Not surprisingly the attorney for the vegetarians who had objections to some of the groups was not pleased. Michael Hyman told the Chicago Sun Times, “We still have a beef. . . . We will review our options.” Assuming the settlement groups remain as they are now, this means there will likely be an appeal.

Source:

Judge cuts 3 groups from $10 mil. McD settlement. Sandra Guy, Chicago Sun-Times, March 26, 2003.