He should of told her to move forward so the next customers coffee wouldn't get cold waiting on the counter like it usually does, she dumped it in her own lap, the appeals Judge called it right, under the 20 grand she wanted, the rest was eaten by the lawyers fees, maybe they felt sorry for her and didn't charge her.... Lol, yeah right.
Your coffee is going to be even colder than you suggest, if it sits on the counter. Mcdonalds lost the case, paid damages and defense lawyer fees. And now they keep their coffee less than scalding hot, as they should.
A person shouldn't have to anticipate 3rd degree burns from spilled coffee.
I would anticipate a piece of glass to break if it fell on concrete and would count myself lucky if it didn't.
The iPhone has 2 primary glass surfaces. Gorilla glass or no, there's no guarantee it will survive 3 or 4 foot drops.
It's like a long-stemmed wine glass. It's reasonable to assume it will be full of wine and the holder of said glass will be imbibing. It is reasonable to expect a fair percentage of glasses to be dropped or knocked over.
You'd think wine glass makers would be drowning in class action lawsuits.
Apple is swimming in money and everyone wants a piece. Drum up a bunch of attorneys and scare them into settling out of court.
The iPhone has 2 primary glass surfaces. Gorilla glass or no, there's no guarantee it will survive 3 or 4 foot drops.
It's like a long-stemmed wine glass. It's reasonable to assume it will be full of wine and the holder of said glass will be imbibing. It is reasonable to expect a fair percentage of glasses to be dropped or knocked over.
You'd think wine glass makers would be drowning in class action lawsuits.
Apple is swimming in money and everyone wants a piece. Drum up a bunch of attorneys and scare them into settling out of court.
One, a wine glass doesnt cost a thousand bucks.
Two, when was the last time you packed a wine glass on your daily to and fro?
Another reason that a law should be implemented where the originator of a deemed frivolous lawsuit has to pay not only his own legal fees, but Apple's to. Then these ridiculous lawsuits would stop.
Another reason that a law should be implemented where the originator of a deemed frivolous lawsuit has to pay not only his own legal fees, but Apple's to. Then these ridiculous lawsuits would stop.
I'm pretty sure the winners get costs as well, so I'm also pretty sure you wish for nothing.
I'm surprised there hasn't been a lawsuit regarding the glass before this. I'm sure there are one or two floating around.
I dropped my iPhone 4 about a month or so ago. About 3 feet onto the pavement. Luckily I have an InCase Snap Smoke case, the case took a nice dent at the corner of impact.
While I do not agree with the lawsuit, I also do not think the iPhone 4 design is durable.
While I agree that dude's a retard, and americans sue each other too much, it is irresponsible of Apple to advertise the iPhone4 as being ""20 times stiffer and 30 times harder than plastic," considering the numbers show it breaks twice as often as the iPhone3.
There ARE, believe it or not, people who believe company advertising when they buy their phones, and maybe this guy bought the phone thinking it would be durable. Sure, everybody at AI knows it's a glass phone and thus extremely fragile, but the marketing babble about helicopters, etc might make a lot of people thinking that it might be as durable as a Nintendo DS or PSP similar product (which can be dropped frequently and survive), or indeed an iPhone3.
Having said that, I think Americans are fools for allowing their legal system to be so basically retarded.
You'd think wine glass makers would be drowning in class action lawsuits.
First of all, McDonald's never claimed their coffee was l20 times colder than normal coffee, or that their hot coffee would burn you 30 times less than the competing coffee, or that helicopter pilots drink it because it's safer or anything like that. Fresh coffee is hot and will burn you. That case was a pretty obvious example of how fucked up the american judicial system is...
Second, wine glass makers don't claim their glasses are 20 times more durable than plastic cups, or that you could build a train or helicopter out of them...
Second, wine glass makers don't claim their glasses are 20 times more durable than plastic cups, or that you could build a train or helicopter out of them...
This is my new goal in life: to own a helicopter made out of glass.
Commercial drip coffee brewers have a water temp of between 205-210 degrees F pre brew chamber and 190-195 degrees F post brew, this temperature has been proven historically to provide the best tasting brew. If you happen to get a cup that has been poured from a just brewed pot then 190 or so is what the temp will be. McDonald's doesn't tell the franchisee how hot to hold coffee at, the local board of health does and the rules vary by location. Of the locations/standards I have seen it appears that somewhere between 130-140 is the desired temp. This is for sanitation/safety purposes BTW. Note that new water heaters caution you about setting water temps above 120 to protect from scalding....this is how lawsuits happen.
There is no content in this post related to coffee that is correct.
I'd bet that the same people who are railing about greedy lawyers are the same ones who, in a different context would be shouting, "that's the way capitalism works, commie bastard!"
Like it or not, our civil law system, particularly tort law, is based on capitalism. The alternative workable system is one where the government more actively regulates and prosecutes companies for making faulty and dangerous products. Eliminating or limiting the ability of people to pursue damages not only isn't workable on its own, but it is a recipe for disaster in product quality and safety.
I'd bet that the same people who are railing about greedy lawyers are the same ones who, in a different context would be shouting, "that's the way capitalism works, commie bastard!"
Like it or not, our civil law system, particularly tort law, is based on capitalism. The alternative workable system is one where the government more actively regulates and prosecutes companies for making faulty and dangerous products. Eliminating or limiting the ability of people to pursue damages not only isn't workable on its own, but it is a recipe for disaster in product quality and safety.
Capitalism isn't capitalism without ethics. There will always be greedy bastards looking to work the system.
And, for the record, my iPhone 4 dropped about 7 feet from a shelf onto a hard tile floor and bounced around like a hockey puck. It's got a dent in the edge of the glass, but it works perfectly. I've also been carrying it without a case since August and it has a tiny hairline scratch here and there, but nothing noticeable. For as fragile as it looks, the iPhone 4 is a freaking tank.
Capitalism isn't capitalism without ethics. There will always be greedy bastards looking to work the system. ...
Capitalism isn't based on ethics, it's based on law, and the ability to enforce agreements through the law. If you tie the hands of one side in a transaction -- i.e., limit the ability of people to sue for damages -- you pervert capitalism into something that isn't capitalism.
However, I will agree with your second statement, and without reference to the current case under discussion, will point out that sometimes those "greedy bastards" aren't the consumers or the lawyers.
"20 times stiffer and 30 times harder than plastic," and is "ultradurable" having been made from the same material as the "glass used in helicopters and high-speed trains."
If Apple actually claims this, then they are in trouble.
Materials that are stiffer and harder (sorry!) tend to also be more likely to shatter. Hardness is great at protecting from keys, less good at protecting from floors.
After taking an engineering law course, I think the coffee one was rather legitimate.
It wasn't a guy, it was an old lady traveling with her grandson. The car was parked and the lady tried to add cream to her coffee, but the cup slipped and and spilled on her. Her grandson immediately got out of the car and pulled her out and dropped her sweat pants to prevent any more burning, but by that time she already had 2nd and 3rd degree burns to her legs and crotch area.
McDonald's instructed their franchises to serve coffee at a higher than industry standard temperature knowing that it could cause 3rd degree burns in under 10 seconds, while (going from memory here) a 3 degree drop in temperature (it might of been higher, but it was definitely less than 10 degrees) would increase the required exposure time to about a minute. The reason they served coffee at a higher temperature was to save money on coffee beans. They had basically determined that it was cheaper to pay for the occasional lawsuit than to lower the temperature the coffee was served at. The lady was only suing for her medical bills, but was awarded much more because of the deplorable practices McDonald's was engaged in as a corporation.
There are a lot of frivolous lawsuits out there, like the iPhone one, but I'd have to say that the McDonald's coffee one wasn't one of them. Had McDonald's served coffee at the industry standard temperature, that lady would not have been burned nearly as severely. McDonald's knew the risks but corporate greed overruled the safety of its customers.
the woman was holding a cup of hot coffee between her legs in a car while trying to remove the lid.
that is hardly "normal use" of a coffee cup.
moreover, the temperature of McDonald's coffee was perfectly in line with the National Coffee Association's brew temp and service temp recommendations for "optimal" coffee. (195-205 brew temp, 180-185 serving temp) McDonald's machines tested at 185 F.
WTH is industrial standard temperature for coffee? I like my coffee colder, my wife warmer. When one is lazy and won't put the cup into the cupholder in the car when adding the cream and is holding it between the legs, then that person deserves being burned. Another candidate for a "moron of the century".
And btw I would never buy the coffee at fastfood place - it's disgusting garbage.
believe it or not, science dictates a specific temperature to best extract the flavor from ground coffee beans. that is found to be approx 195-205 F.
this is part of the reason coffee fanatics are very specific with their brewing - most home drip pots make shit coffee because of very poor temperature monitoring. my espresso machine though, has a thermostat, and the boiler keeps the brewing water @ 92 C (197-ish F) ...best consumed immediately.
when i brew "drip" i use a kitchen thermometer in my vacuum brew pot to keep the new water at 195-200 F, same deal as espresso.
Comments
He should of told her to move forward so the next customers coffee wouldn't get cold waiting on the counter like it usually does, she dumped it in her own lap, the appeals Judge called it right, under the 20 grand she wanted, the rest was eaten by the lawyers fees, maybe they felt sorry for her and didn't charge her.... Lol, yeah right.
Your coffee is going to be even colder than you suggest, if it sits on the counter. Mcdonalds lost the case, paid damages and defense lawyer fees. And now they keep their coffee less than scalding hot, as they should.
A person shouldn't have to anticipate 3rd degree burns from spilled coffee.
I would anticipate a piece of glass to break if it fell on concrete and would count myself lucky if it didn't.
The iPhone has 2 primary glass surfaces. Gorilla glass or no, there's no guarantee it will survive 3 or 4 foot drops.
It's like a long-stemmed wine glass. It's reasonable to assume it will be full of wine and the holder of said glass will be imbibing. It is reasonable to expect a fair percentage of glasses to be dropped or knocked over.
You'd think wine glass makers would be drowning in class action lawsuits.
Apple is swimming in money and everyone wants a piece. Drum up a bunch of attorneys and scare them into settling out of court.
The McDoo lawsuit had merit. This doesn't, IMHO.
The iPhone has 2 primary glass surfaces. Gorilla glass or no, there's no guarantee it will survive 3 or 4 foot drops.
It's like a long-stemmed wine glass. It's reasonable to assume it will be full of wine and the holder of said glass will be imbibing. It is reasonable to expect a fair percentage of glasses to be dropped or knocked over.
You'd think wine glass makers would be drowning in class action lawsuits.
Apple is swimming in money and everyone wants a piece. Drum up a bunch of attorneys and scare them into settling out of court.
One, a wine glass doesnt cost a thousand bucks.
Two, when was the last time you packed a wine glass on your daily to and fro?
Bad analogy.
One, a wine glass doesnt cost a thousand bucks.
Two, when was the last time you packed a wine glass on your daily to and fro?
Bad analogy.
I own something. I misuse it. It breaks.
It's my fault. I can't sue. I should be jailed for trying.
That's the analogy.
Another reason that a law should be implemented where the originator of a deemed frivolous lawsuit has to pay not only his own legal fees, but Apple's to. Then these ridiculous lawsuits would stop.
I'm pretty sure the winners get costs as well, so I'm also pretty sure you wish for nothing.
I own something. I misuse it. It breaks.
It's my fault. I can't sue. I should be jailed for trying.
That's the analogy.
And its a poor one. Just sayin'.
I dropped my iPhone 4 about a month or so ago. About 3 feet onto the pavement. Luckily I have an InCase Snap Smoke case, the case took a nice dent at the corner of impact.
While I do not agree with the lawsuit, I also do not think the iPhone 4 design is durable.
Still, for me, it's the best phone I ever had.
Just my 2 cents.
There ARE, believe it or not, people who believe company advertising when they buy their phones, and maybe this guy bought the phone thinking it would be durable. Sure, everybody at AI knows it's a glass phone and thus extremely fragile, but the marketing babble about helicopters, etc might make a lot of people thinking that it might be as durable as a Nintendo DS or PSP similar product (which can be dropped frequently and survive), or indeed an iPhone3.
Having said that, I think Americans are fools for allowing their legal system to be so basically retarded.
The McDoo lawsuit had merit. This doesn't, IMHO.
You'd think wine glass makers would be drowning in class action lawsuits.
First of all, McDonald's never claimed their coffee was l20 times colder than normal coffee, or that their hot coffee would burn you 30 times less than the competing coffee, or that helicopter pilots drink it because it's safer or anything like that. Fresh coffee is hot and will burn you. That case was a pretty obvious example of how fucked up the american judicial system is...
Second, wine glass makers don't claim their glasses are 20 times more durable than plastic cups, or that you could build a train or helicopter out of them...
Second, wine glass makers don't claim their glasses are 20 times more durable than plastic cups, or that you could build a train or helicopter out of them...
This is my new goal in life: to own a helicopter made out of glass.
Commercial drip coffee brewers have a water temp of between 205-210 degrees F pre brew chamber and 190-195 degrees F post brew, this temperature has been proven historically to provide the best tasting brew. If you happen to get a cup that has been poured from a just brewed pot then 190 or so is what the temp will be. McDonald's doesn't tell the franchisee how hot to hold coffee at, the local board of health does and the rules vary by location. Of the locations/standards I have seen it appears that somewhere between 130-140 is the desired temp. This is for sanitation/safety purposes BTW. Note that new water heaters caution you about setting water temps above 120 to protect from scalding....this is how lawsuits happen.
There is no content in this post related to coffee that is correct.
Like it or not, our civil law system, particularly tort law, is based on capitalism. The alternative workable system is one where the government more actively regulates and prosecutes companies for making faulty and dangerous products. Eliminating or limiting the ability of people to pursue damages not only isn't workable on its own, but it is a recipe for disaster in product quality and safety.
I'd bet that the same people who are railing about greedy lawyers are the same ones who, in a different context would be shouting, "that's the way capitalism works, commie bastard!"
Like it or not, our civil law system, particularly tort law, is based on capitalism. The alternative workable system is one where the government more actively regulates and prosecutes companies for making faulty and dangerous products. Eliminating or limiting the ability of people to pursue damages not only isn't workable on its own, but it is a recipe for disaster in product quality and safety.
Capitalism isn't capitalism without ethics. There will always be greedy bastards looking to work the system.
And, for the record, my iPhone 4 dropped about 7 feet from a shelf onto a hard tile floor and bounced around like a hockey puck. It's got a dent in the edge of the glass, but it works perfectly. I've also been carrying it without a case since August and it has a tiny hairline scratch here and there, but nothing noticeable. For as fragile as it looks, the iPhone 4 is a freaking tank.
Another customer trying to get a free Iphone. No smartphone is breakproof. If he bought the phone for a child perhaps a better case would have helped.
If this guy has enough money to sue Apple, he is able to afford a new iPhone 4.
Capitalism isn't capitalism without ethics. There will always be greedy bastards looking to work the system. ...
Capitalism isn't based on ethics, it's based on law, and the ability to enforce agreements through the law. If you tie the hands of one side in a transaction -- i.e., limit the ability of people to sue for damages -- you pervert capitalism into something that isn't capitalism.
However, I will agree with your second statement, and without reference to the current case under discussion, will point out that sometimes those "greedy bastards" aren't the consumers or the lawyers.
"20 times stiffer and 30 times harder than plastic," and is "ultradurable" having been made from the same material as the "glass used in helicopters and high-speed trains."
If Apple actually claims this, then they are in trouble.
Materials that are stiffer and harder (sorry!) tend to also be more likely to shatter. Hardness is great at protecting from keys, less good at protecting from floors.
After taking an engineering law course, I think the coffee one was rather legitimate.
It wasn't a guy, it was an old lady traveling with her grandson. The car was parked and the lady tried to add cream to her coffee, but the cup slipped and and spilled on her. Her grandson immediately got out of the car and pulled her out and dropped her sweat pants to prevent any more burning, but by that time she already had 2nd and 3rd degree burns to her legs and crotch area.
McDonald's instructed their franchises to serve coffee at a higher than industry standard temperature knowing that it could cause 3rd degree burns in under 10 seconds, while (going from memory here) a 3 degree drop in temperature (it might of been higher, but it was definitely less than 10 degrees) would increase the required exposure time to about a minute. The reason they served coffee at a higher temperature was to save money on coffee beans. They had basically determined that it was cheaper to pay for the occasional lawsuit than to lower the temperature the coffee was served at. The lady was only suing for her medical bills, but was awarded much more because of the deplorable practices McDonald's was engaged in as a corporation.
There are a lot of frivolous lawsuits out there, like the iPhone one, but I'd have to say that the McDonald's coffee one wasn't one of them. Had McDonald's served coffee at the industry standard temperature, that lady would not have been burned nearly as severely. McDonald's knew the risks but corporate greed overruled the safety of its customers.
the woman was holding a cup of hot coffee between her legs in a car while trying to remove the lid.
that is hardly "normal use" of a coffee cup.
moreover, the temperature of McDonald's coffee was perfectly in line with the National Coffee Association's brew temp and service temp recommendations for "optimal" coffee. (195-205 brew temp, 180-185 serving temp) McDonald's machines tested at 185 F.
http://www.ncausa.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=71
WTH is industrial standard temperature for coffee? I like my coffee colder, my wife warmer. When one is lazy and won't put the cup into the cupholder in the car when adding the cream and is holding it between the legs, then that person deserves being burned. Another candidate for a "moron of the century".
And btw I would never buy the coffee at fastfood place - it's disgusting garbage.
believe it or not, science dictates a specific temperature to best extract the flavor from ground coffee beans. that is found to be approx 195-205 F.
this is part of the reason coffee fanatics are very specific with their brewing - most home drip pots make shit coffee because of very poor temperature monitoring. my espresso machine though, has a thermostat, and the boiler keeps the brewing water @ 92 C (197-ish F) ...best consumed immediately.
when i brew "drip" i use a kitchen thermometer in my vacuum brew pot to keep the new water at 195-200 F, same deal as espresso.
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2003/DianaGendler.shtml
Is his other daughter the one that fell into a fountain at the shopping mall?
...she is suing too....
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/new...ntain-texting/