Forbidden fruit tastes better, I guess.hmmm hot coffee mod.
why are all the teachers in these cases Milf worthy and could clearly get any amount of penor they care to have?
Forbidden fruit tastes better, I guess.hmmm hot coffee mod.
why are all the teachers in these cases Milf worthy and could clearly get any amount of penor they care to have?
Wut tyop?
Yuck! Why did you point that out?In the dang title! Some modular internet forum person youR are!!
Uhh if it was that hot holding the cup would have been proof enough that I should not take a sip.
Are people really this incompetent though? I mean... really.
Why didn't I have any teachers like that in school?
Compared to the other ones that have happened in the recent past, she's not that good looking.
I knew you would take that route.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.
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...
I used to think that the lawsuit wasn't valid......then I read the details about it.
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.
I used to think that the lawsuit wasn't valid......then I read the details about it.
http://www.vanosteen.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htmI used to think that the lawsuit wasn't valid......then I read the details about it.
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.
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.
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.