Are your freaking kidding me?
- Thread starter Duke
- Start date
You can bypass thermodynamics to tel how hot something is? Styrofoam cups keep the temperature inside of them. You wouldn't feel the heat that much to be able to tell.
Compared to the other ones that have happened in the recent past, she's not that good looking.
The dudes 14. I'm not sure it was that big of an issue?
"Oh man, this teacher totally wants to do me, but she's kinda meh. I'll totally hold out for a hotter teacher. Fur sure."
I knew you would take that route.
Do you not test the liquid first before you drink? I know when I have my tea in the mornings that I bring it up to my face and can feel how hot it is by the steam and I take the smallest sip to test the temperature.
Please don't defend people not taking responsibility for themselves. I hope you're playing devil's advocate.
Coqui likes to argue about everything. He can't be dumb enough to think that her lawsuit was valid. Wait, he's an OSU fan...
Its hot fucking coffee. I don't care if its 311F, if you spill it on yourself ITS NO ONE ELSES FAULT. Take some personal fucking responsibility.
This.
I studied it in my business law course. Read the facts before you decide to believe only what the media tells you about it being a frivolous case.
This is pretty close to the facts as I remember studying them.
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
http://www.vanosteen.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm
Okay I refreshed my memory about it and I still think it is ridiculous to sue for spilled coffee.
Sure, let a company know that their product (if used incorrectly or accidentally) causes X. Suing them for it is just petty. It's like someone tripping on a perfectly good sidewalk and then suing the city. It is not the company's fault or social duty to protect their consumers to that extent.
McDonalds was aware that the coffee was a burn hazard well before this woman was injured. in fact:
During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700
claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims
involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This
history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of
this hazard.
the jury's decision agrees with you. They ruled that she was 20% at fault and adjusted her damages accordingly.
If it was hot enough to burn the flesh away from her legs and genitals and melt her clothes to her skin, and McDonalds knew that before ever selling that product because this had happened 700 times before...that's irresponsible. Sometimes it takes a lawsuit like this to make a company change irresponsible behavior.
Also, fun fact, she only originally asked them for 20,000 to cover her medical expenses and they refused. She wasn't out for a payday, just to cover her expenses.
Where is flaming glory when you need him; he'd do a much better job presenting this than I have. Probably fix my grammar too
But it's the company's fault or duty to serve coffee at a reasonable temperature (i.e. should a spil occur, the skin shouldn't be peeling off within 2 seconds.) I'm glad she wasn't out for money and only after repaying the damage actualy caused to her (ie the bills as a direct result of the injury) had she been going after money, I'd be less willing to be on her side.
Last edited:
And IIRC they were settled for more than twice the amount this case was asking for as well.