This idiot in Florida is wrong, the judge should summarily throw this case out and reprimand the lawyers for filing this idiotic lawsuit.
Agreed, these idiots and their lawyers should be fined when they loose such cases. The lawyers should be docked 1 years wages for every case like this they enter. The idiots who agree with such cases should be removed from the gene pool so we can eventually be rid of such idiocy.
Well, actually the lady who sued McDonalds was a 81 year old woman. She was burnt in the parking lot in a parked car. The coffee was served at 185 degrees, which is enough to cause 3rd degree burns in three seconds. She was hospitalized for days. The coffee was served at 20 degrees hotter then most restaurants serve their coffee, and most places serve their coffee hotter then people do at home. That particular McDonalds had over 700 complaints of people getting third degree burns from their coffee. McDonald's own witness claimed he knew the coffee was served at a dangerously hot temperature and no warnings were posted despite this knowledge. By comparison, coffee you drink at home is served around 130 degrees. The woman after appeals ended up with $780 thousand dollars. This damage reward contained two parts. The first part was to cover the plaintiff's actual damages (e.g. the hospital visit). The second part was punitive damages that were rewarded because it was found that McDonald's actions were recklessly dangerous. That was designed to deter McDonald's future bad behavior. McDonald's probably makes over a million dollars a second, so I doubt it felt any pain from the verdict.
I do not know about you, but when I order hot coffee and place it between my legs, I know I might get burnt because I have burnt myself before. I, however, wouldn't expect to get third degree burns. I also would expect the place I am buying a product from to warn me if its product was more dangerous then normal.
Damn, why didn't the chainsaw manufacturer explain to me better not to hold my chainsaw by the chain end while running it. I sure miss my fingers. They were reckless in not doing so, I'm going to sue.
Damn, why didn't the chainsaw manufacturer explain to me better not to hold my chainsaw by the chain end while running it. I sure miss my fingers. They were reckless in not doing so, I'm going to sue.
I think an adequate comparison would be if McD's sold a chain saw where the blade circulates through the handle.
Damn, why didn't the chainsaw manufacturer explain to me better not to hold my chainsaw by the chain end while running it. I sure miss my fingers. They were reckless in not doing so, I'm going to sue.
They did! You just failed to read the safety manual that came with your chainsaw.
That particular McDonalds had over 700 complaints of people getting third degree burns from their coffee. .
Rubbish. 700 people acquiring 3rd degree burns from a single McDonalds would have prompted immediate intervention. I ran a restaurant that brews coffee at 180-190 degrees and my establishment never received a single complaint or threat of legal action from someone acquiring a burn from coffee in more than 4 years. It's unlikely that my customers were THAT much more adept at handling hot coffee than the "average" coffee buyer. I was sued for other things (mostly slips and falls, or breaking a tooth because you bit into a fork, etc), but never because someone acquired a 3rd degree burn from coffee.
Food Service Industry standard for brewing coffee is between 180-190*F. Mcdonalds' standard at the time called for 190-200*F. Those of you who say that the serving temperature is 130-135*F are incorrect. Most food service establishments throw excess coffee away when it hits 140*F. And for those of you who've never had the esteemed privilege to work in the food service industry, the vast majority of customers won't even drink coffee that's 140*F. They'll ask for a microwave to heat it up, or request a fresh pot.
To the poster I've quoted, you've obviously never worked in a place that serves coffee during the breakfast rush. If you even drink coffee, you've also obviously never measured the temperature of the coffee you're receiving out of a commercial urn. And if by some slim chance you actually do prefer your coffee at 135*F, you're a member of a statistical vast minority.
By comparison, coffee you drink at home is served around 130 degrees....
Not my first cup. I pour my first cup before the entire pot has finished brewing and at above 180°F
Still a stupid lawsuit. Coffee is hot, even 135° F burns, just not 3rd degree. People know coffee is hot, how hot is irrelevant because every one knows coffee is hot and should be handled accordingly. Whether 135° or 185° only matters to the stupid people that don't handle anything that is hot carelessly.
Time for people to take responsiblity for their stupidity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerrinB
...
Tort reform usually puts caps on liability, which unfortunately, denies people with genuine grievances adequate damages....
We need tort reform of some kind, what kind I don't know - though caps do seem unAmerican.
I've think we should make doctors head of the bar association and lawyers the head of the medical association - let the fun begin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerrinB
...
Apple already scored a legal victory in this case, by having the suit removed to California instead of Florida.....
Thank you for this information, why should California be any different than Florida though??
And the earth is flat. Listen, I'm sorry that the woman was hurt, but if she is that (*******) to put almost boiling hot coffee between her legs then she.... I mean, you never ever put something that HOT between your legs.
And the earth is flat. Listen, I'm sorry that the woman was hurt, but if she is that (*******) to put almost boiling hot coffee between her legs then she.... I mean, you never ever put something that HOT between your legs.
For you to take such an radically unconstitutional view of reality and of the legal system, and continue to define the facts of the case in your "blame the victim" way, means you have given up on democratic society. The facts are, the jury found the woman partially responsible, because she had put the coffee between here legs. But with ANY OTHER RETAILER, she would have been wet, uncomfortable, and maybe have some light burns, and case dismissed. It was the deliberate corporate decision of McDonalds to put there coffee at a temperature that, if someone spilled it, they might be severely burned. They decided to let their customers be injured so they could use cheaper beans and mask the taste with the heat. The jury heard the evidence, and they hadn't made up their mind about the case beforehand. And if you think that it's all right for a corporation to deliberately scald its customers so they can make more money, kindly move to Soviet Corporateville.
From Wikipedia, here's a description of the maneuvers that went on before the lawsuit.
"Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for US $20,000 to cover her medical costs, which were $11,000, but the company offered only $800. When McDonald's refused to raise its offer, Liebeck retained Texas attorney Reed Morgan. Morgan filed suit in a New Mexico District Court accusing McDonald's of ?gross negligence? for selling coffee that was ?unreasonably dangerous? and ?defectively manufactured.? McDonald's refused Morgan's offer to settle for $90,000.
Morgan offered to settle for $300,000, and a mediator suggested $225,000 just before trial, but McDonald's refused these final pre-trial attempts to settle.
McDonald's refused to settle perhaps because, though there had been numerous lawsuits alleging that hot coffee was ?defectively manufactured,? courts had consistently dismissed the cases before trial on the grounds that coffee burns were an open and obvious danger."
And what the hell, their legal department could crush any individual litigant.
You most certainly do not drink it at 180 degrees. If you did, you would scald your mouth and your larynx.
You win the award. I pour my coffee, add some milk, go outside and read the sports page, and gasp, sometimes I even microwave it to bring the temperature back up.
You're completely correct, but I'm not stupid and take care when handling things that are hot, unlike this poor unfortunate stupid woman who didn't and blamed her stupidity on some one else. People, it is time to accept the world isn't perfect, we're not perfect, but we need to stand up and accept our mistakes. And if, the unexpected happened, and I accidently burned myseld, I wouldn't sue the company that designed our coffee brewer with the built in valve allowing ability to pour coffee while brewing is continuing.
Citing the court settlement doesn't mean anything, our court system often has nothing to do with justice. Courts often don't decide based on justice, only the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swift
But with ANY OTHER RETAILER, she would have been wet, uncomfortable, and maybe have some light burns, and case dismissed
Prove it.
Actually, your own quote,"there had been numerous lawsuits alleging that hot coffee was ?defectively manufactured,? courts had consistently dismissed the cases before trial on the grounds that coffee burns were an open and obvious danger.", shows that in other court cases sanity did indeed prevail.
This frivolous lawsuit in concerning the iPod and iTunes is symptomatic of our society.
the iTunes case is totally frivolous. throw it out, for sure...
for all the back and forth about the McDonalds case - it takes only a moment to find some facts about commercial coffee makers. This is directly from a site that sells commercial coffee makers by Bunn:
Ideal coffee holding temperature: 175ºF to 185ºF (80ºC to 85ºC)
Most all the volatile aromatics in coffee have boiling points well below that of water and continue to evaporate from the surface until pressure in the serving container reaches equilibrium. A closed container can slow the process of evaporation.
Ideal coffee serving temperature: 155ºF to 175ºF (70ºC to 80ºC)
Many of the volatile aromatics in coffee have boiling points above 150ºF (65ºC). They simply are not perceived when coffee is served at lower temperatures.
So serving coffee at a temperature like 130ºF as several people here have suggested, would actually be serving a sub-standard product. According to the ideal coffee serving temperature quoted here, even at the lowest ideal temperature, you could scald yourself in 1 second. This certainly supports the comment that somebody made saying their commercial coffee maker poured out coffee of about 190ºF.
Also keep in mind that this is the standard that Bunn's commercial coffee makers comply with, so you could scald yourself at any restaurant that uses unaltered, straight from the factory Bunn coffee makers.
She belongs in assisted living then, for the frail and infirm, if she can't handle "life" as it is in this world. This is all too stupid for reality, only in the American legal system, which I've lived in all my life and definitely seems to be getting worse by the year...
When you are old and drooling into your lap and pissing in your pants, I sincerely hope that your assisted living caregiver has much more compassion for the elderly than you seem to have right now. Then maybe you'll remember the stupid things you've said in the past and do something to make up for it.
Funny, the people who gets smacked hard by karma are usually those who think they can evade it.
Comments
Exactly how dumb is dirt?
You have to asks Joe's mom, Mrs. Dirt.
I sure hope you're kidding. If you're not, this is too idiotic to even dignify with a response.
I was just about to post the exact same response.
Hej I actually agree with the class-action.
Apple is getting bigger and they certainly have a monopoly in this field.
So I wish em luck
Dude you haven't dacloo.
Get over it, you're wrong.
This idiot in Florida is wrong, the judge should summarily throw this case out and reprimand the lawyers for filing this idiotic lawsuit.
Agreed, these idiots and their lawyers should be fined when they loose such cases. The lawyers should be docked 1 years wages for every case like this they enter. The idiots who agree with such cases should be removed from the gene pool so we can eventually be rid of such idiocy.
Fact: Microsoft license out their brand of DRM to third parties.
Fact: Apple don't license out their brand of DRM to third parties.
You responded to someone that mentioned the Zune. MS licensed Plays For Sure, but the Zune does not use it. They have a different scheme for Zune.
Well, actually the lady who sued McDonalds was a 81 year old woman. She was burnt in the parking lot in a parked car. The coffee was served at 185 degrees, which is enough to cause 3rd degree burns in three seconds. She was hospitalized for days. The coffee was served at 20 degrees hotter then most restaurants serve their coffee, and most places serve their coffee hotter then people do at home. That particular McDonalds had over 700 complaints of people getting third degree burns from their coffee. McDonald's own witness claimed he knew the coffee was served at a dangerously hot temperature and no warnings were posted despite this knowledge. By comparison, coffee you drink at home is served around 130 degrees. The woman after appeals ended up with $780 thousand dollars. This damage reward contained two parts. The first part was to cover the plaintiff's actual damages (e.g. the hospital visit). The second part was punitive damages that were rewarded because it was found that McDonald's actions were recklessly dangerous. That was designed to deter McDonald's future bad behavior. McDonald's probably makes over a million dollars a second, so I doubt it felt any pain from the verdict.
I do not know about you, but when I order hot coffee and place it between my legs, I know I might get burnt because I have burnt myself before. I, however, wouldn't expect to get third degree burns. I also would expect the place I am buying a product from to warn me if its product was more dangerous then normal.
Damn, why didn't the chainsaw manufacturer explain to me better not to hold my chainsaw by the chain end while running it. I sure miss my fingers. They were reckless in not doing so, I'm going to sue.
Damn, why didn't the chainsaw manufacturer explain to me better not to hold my chainsaw by the chain end while running it. I sure miss my fingers. They were reckless in not doing so, I'm going to sue.
I think an adequate comparison would be if McD's sold a chain saw where the blade circulates through the handle.
Damn, why didn't the chainsaw manufacturer explain to me better not to hold my chainsaw by the chain end while running it. I sure miss my fingers. They were reckless in not doing so, I'm going to sue.
They did! You just failed to read the safety manual that came with your chainsaw.
That particular McDonalds had over 700 complaints of people getting third degree burns from their coffee. .
Rubbish. 700 people acquiring 3rd degree burns from a single McDonalds would have prompted immediate intervention. I ran a restaurant that brews coffee at 180-190 degrees and my establishment never received a single complaint or threat of legal action from someone acquiring a burn from coffee in more than 4 years. It's unlikely that my customers were THAT much more adept at handling hot coffee than the "average" coffee buyer. I was sued for other things (mostly slips and falls, or breaking a tooth because you bit into a fork, etc), but never because someone acquired a 3rd degree burn from coffee.
Food Service Industry standard for brewing coffee is between 180-190*F. Mcdonalds' standard at the time called for 190-200*F. Those of you who say that the serving temperature is 130-135*F are incorrect. Most food service establishments throw excess coffee away when it hits 140*F. And for those of you who've never had the esteemed privilege to work in the food service industry, the vast majority of customers won't even drink coffee that's 140*F. They'll ask for a microwave to heat it up, or request a fresh pot.
To the poster I've quoted, you've obviously never worked in a place that serves coffee during the breakfast rush. If you even drink coffee, you've also obviously never measured the temperature of the coffee you're receiving out of a commercial urn. And if by some slim chance you actually do prefer your coffee at 135*F, you're a member of a statistical vast minority.
And if by some slim chance you actually do prefer your coffee at 135*F, you're a member of a statistical vast minority.
"vast" means big, not small. A vast minority, assuming it even makes sense, would have to be 49%.
...
By comparison, coffee you drink at home is served around 130 degrees....
Not my first cup. I pour my first cup before the entire pot has finished brewing and at above 180°F
Still a stupid lawsuit. Coffee is hot, even 135° F burns, just not 3rd degree. People know coffee is hot, how hot is irrelevant because every one knows coffee is hot and should be handled accordingly. Whether 135° or 185° only matters to the stupid people that don't handle anything that is hot carelessly.
Time for people to take responsiblity for their stupidity.
...
Tort reform usually puts caps on liability, which unfortunately, denies people with genuine grievances adequate damages....
We need tort reform of some kind, what kind I don't know - though caps do seem unAmerican.
I've think we should make doctors head of the bar association and lawyers the head of the medical association - let the fun begin.
...
Apple already scored a legal victory in this case, by having the suit removed to California instead of Florida.....
Thank you for this information, why should California be any different than Florida though??
That was legit.
And the earth is flat. Listen, I'm sorry that the woman was hurt, but if she is that (*******) to put almost boiling hot coffee between her legs then she.... I mean, you never ever put something that HOT between your legs.
And the earth is flat. Listen, I'm sorry that the woman was hurt, but if she is that (*******) to put almost boiling hot coffee between her legs then she.... I mean, you never ever put something that HOT between your legs.
For you to take such an radically unconstitutional view of reality and of the legal system, and continue to define the facts of the case in your "blame the victim" way, means you have given up on democratic society. The facts are, the jury found the woman partially responsible, because she had put the coffee between here legs. But with ANY OTHER RETAILER, she would have been wet, uncomfortable, and maybe have some light burns, and case dismissed. It was the deliberate corporate decision of McDonalds to put there coffee at a temperature that, if someone spilled it, they might be severely burned. They decided to let their customers be injured so they could use cheaper beans and mask the taste with the heat. The jury heard the evidence, and they hadn't made up their mind about the case beforehand. And if you think that it's all right for a corporation to deliberately scald its customers so they can make more money, kindly move to Soviet Corporateville.
Not my first cup. I pour my first cup before the entire pot has finished brewing and at above 180°F
You most certainly do not drink it at 180 degrees. If you did, you would scald your mouth and your larynx.
"Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for US $20,000 to cover her medical costs, which were $11,000, but the company offered only $800. When McDonald's refused to raise its offer, Liebeck retained Texas attorney Reed Morgan. Morgan filed suit in a New Mexico District Court accusing McDonald's of ?gross negligence? for selling coffee that was ?unreasonably dangerous? and ?defectively manufactured.? McDonald's refused Morgan's offer to settle for $90,000.
Morgan offered to settle for $300,000, and a mediator suggested $225,000 just before trial, but McDonald's refused these final pre-trial attempts to settle.
McDonald's refused to settle perhaps because, though there had been numerous lawsuits alleging that hot coffee was ?defectively manufactured,? courts had consistently dismissed the cases before trial on the grounds that coffee burns were an open and obvious danger."
And what the hell, their legal department could crush any individual litigant.
You most certainly do not drink it at 180 degrees. If you did, you would scald your mouth and your larynx.
You win the award. I pour my coffee, add some milk, go outside and read the sports page, and gasp, sometimes I even microwave it to bring the temperature back up
You're completely correct, but I'm not stupid and take care when handling things that are hot, unlike this poor unfortunate stupid woman who didn't and blamed her stupidity on some one else. People, it is time to accept the world isn't perfect, we're not perfect, but we need to stand up and accept our mistakes. And if, the unexpected happened, and I accidently burned myseld, I wouldn't sue the company that designed our coffee brewer with the built in valve allowing ability to pour coffee while brewing is continuing.
Citing the court settlement doesn't mean anything, our court system often has nothing to do with justice. Courts often don't decide based on justice, only the law.
But with ANY OTHER RETAILER, she would have been wet, uncomfortable, and maybe have some light burns, and case dismissed
Prove it.
Actually, your own quote,"there had been numerous lawsuits alleging that hot coffee was ?defectively manufactured,? courts had consistently dismissed the cases before trial on the grounds that coffee burns were an open and obvious danger.", shows that in other court cases sanity did indeed prevail.
This frivolous lawsuit in concerning the iPod and iTunes is symptomatic of our society.
the iTunes case is totally frivolous. throw it out, for sure...
for all the back and forth about the McDonalds case - it takes only a moment to find some facts about commercial coffee makers. This is directly from a site that sells commercial coffee makers by Bunn:
Ideal coffee holding temperature: 175ºF to 185ºF (80ºC to 85ºC)
Most all the volatile aromatics in coffee have boiling points well below that of water and continue to evaporate from the surface until pressure in the serving container reaches equilibrium. A closed container can slow the process of evaporation.
Ideal coffee serving temperature: 155ºF to 175ºF (70ºC to 80ºC)
Many of the volatile aromatics in coffee have boiling points above 150ºF (65ºC). They simply are not perceived when coffee is served at lower temperatures.
So serving coffee at a temperature like 130ºF as several people here have suggested, would actually be serving a sub-standard product. According to the ideal coffee serving temperature quoted here, even at the lowest ideal temperature, you could scald yourself in 1 second. This certainly supports the comment that somebody made saying their commercial coffee maker poured out coffee of about 190ºF.
Also keep in mind that this is the standard that Bunn's commercial coffee makers comply with, so you could scald yourself at any restaurant that uses unaltered, straight from the factory Bunn coffee makers.
She belongs in assisted living then, for the frail and infirm, if she can't handle "life" as it is in this world. This is all too stupid for reality, only in the American legal system, which I've lived in all my life and definitely seems to be getting worse by the year...
When you are old and drooling into your lap and pissing in your pants, I sincerely hope that your assisted living caregiver has much more compassion for the elderly than you seem to have right now. Then maybe you'll remember the stupid things you've said in the past and do something to make up for it.
Funny, the people who gets smacked hard by karma are usually those who think they can evade it.