Forums | MacLife

"Who was best positioned to spread the costs in this case?" Why should this be on any matter, unless all you are interesting in is "deep pockets"? If you need surgery due to cancer, should you sue Microsoft because it is in the "best position to spread the costs"?

Blame my torts professor.  Tort law decisions are often based on some desire to shape social policy. 

From my reading of the facts in this particular case, I believe the decision was warranted.  Perhaps McDonalds should NOT have paid out on various other medical bills related to burns if they did not intend to in this case. 

Notice I did not claim that the woman deserved such a huge award...simply that her case was not frivolous.  Just MY opinion...no need to get bent-out-of-shape over it.

Do me a favor. Come here. I'll buy you a cup of coffee at that McDonald's, and then we can drive down the nice steep exit after the drive-through. We'll see how quick you are to put that cup of coffee between your knees.

Do me a favor. Come here. I'll buy you a cup of coffee at that McDonald's, and then we can drive down the nice steep exit after the drive-through. We'll see how quick you are to put that cup of coffee between your knees.

That isn't the issue.

The issue is that the coffee was served TOO HOT TO BEGIN WITH!

It was shown that the burn risk was much less at only moderately lower temperatures.

Say the drive-through person dropped the coffee onto the customer's lap.  At THAT point would you care how hot the coffee was, or would you still be insisting that it doesn't matter?

It doesn't matter. Someone in my family suffered the exact same kind of burns from homemade coffee.

an earlier link in this discussion[/url]"]The plaintiffs were apparently able to document 700 cases of burns from McDonald's coffee over 10 years, or 70 burns per year. But that doesn't take into account how many cups are sold without incident. A McDonald's consultant pointed out the 700 cases in 10 years represents just 1 injury per 24 million cups sold! For every injury, no matter how severe, 23,999,999 people managed to drink their coffee without any injury whatever. Isn't that proof that the coffee is not "unreasonably dangerous"?

Coffee is a hot liquid. It doesn't take very much intelligence at all to understand that you don't put a cup of hot liquid between your knees when driving down a steep hill. If you happen to be that one person in twenty-four million who spills hot-ass coffee all over yourself, then I think it's probably your fault, and if I happen to have had the same product several times from the same store you are suing, I'm inclined to be even less sympathetic.

Coffee is a hot liquid. It doesn't take very much intelligence at all to understand that you don't put a cup of hot liquid between your knees when driving down a steep hill.

She wasn't driving.  The record doesn't even state the car was MOVING, to my knowledge.

R E A D!

If you'd actually drank the coffee, I'd say you were more qualified to make that judgement, but in my opinion, you don't have adequate knowledge of the circumstances to do so.

Forgive me for going off of the case record and not anectdotal evidence.  How silly of me!  There's a difference, here.  YOU NEVER SPILT THE COFFEE ON YOURSELF!

I've been in a car, in the exact same drive through as that woman, with the exact same type of cup with the exact same coffee made by the exact same people in the exact same machines, and not only that, but I've done so many many times, and I never got burned, but I did realize, at the age of fourteen or fifteen, that if I put coffee between my knees going down such a steep incline, that bad things could happen.

Again...the woman wasn't driving (she was a passenger!) and the car was stopped.  You're beginning to sound a bit silly by repeatedly misconstruing the facts, matt.

McDonalds required their coffee kept at 185 degrees Fahrenheit, plus  or minus 5 degrees, significantly higher than other establishments.  [Coffee is usually served at 135 to 140 degrees]

An expert testified that 180 degree liquids will cause full thickness  burns in 2 to 7 seconds.

McDonalds knew before this accident that burn hazards exist with  any foods served above 140 degrees.

McDonalds knew that its coffee would burn drinkers at the temperature  they served it.

McDonalds research showed that customers consumed coffee immediately  while driving.

McDonalds knew of over 700 people burned by its coffee, including many  third-degree burns similar to Ms. Liebeck's.

McDonalds had received previous requests from consumers and safety  organizations to lower their coffee temperature.

Evidence showed that McDonalds served their coffee so hot to save money. This let them get away with a cheaper grade of coffee and cut down on the number of free refills they had to give away. McDonalds executives testified that they thought it would be cheaper to pay claims and worker's compensation benefits to people burned by their coffee versus making any of these changes.

tella Liebeck, age 79, was a passenger in the car.

The car was at a full stop so she could add cream and sugar to her coffee.  [She was not the driver and the car was not moving.]

The cup tipped and spilled over her lap.

Within a few seconds, Ms. Liebeck suffered third-degree burns over  6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks,  genitals and groin.

Ms. Liebeck was hospitalized for 8 days, and required skin grafting and  debridement treatments.

Parts of Ms. Liebeck's body were permanently scarred.

Ms. Liebeck tried to settle with McDonald's for $20,000 to cover her  medical expenses. McDonalds offered her $800. She sought mediation,  but McDonald's refused.

The jury initially awarded Ms. Liebeck the equivalent of two days  worth of coffee sales for McDonalds as punitive damages.

The trial judge reduced the verdict to something under $600,000.

My evidence is not anecdotal.

Only one in twenty-four million people got burned by McDonald's coffee.

I had drank coffee from that same McDonalds many many times before, and never gotten burned. How many people drank coffee from this McDonald's daily and how many got burned? The answer? A hell of a lot of people get coffee there daily, and there have been very very few burns.

Someone in my family got the same kind of burns from homemade coffee. As if I didn't already know, this tells me that getting burned by coffee is not a McDonald's specific thing.

I know that I was never burned by the coffee from that McDonald's, and I know that that McDonald's drive through has a very steep drive-through.

Therefore, I know that you can get burned by coffee, and I know that if you put a glass of liquid between your knees while on a steep incline, you are likely to spill that coffee.

I know that there have been very very few reports of burns from McDonald's coffee.

Therefore, getting burned was the woman's own fault.

I had drank coffee from that same McDonalds many many times before, and never gotten burned. How many people drank coffee from this McDonald's daily and how many got burned? The answer? A hell of a lot of people get coffee there daily, and there have been very very few burns.

Did the coffee spill in your lap?

Someone in my family got the same kind of burns from homemade coffee. As if I didn't already know, this tells me that getting burned by coffee is not a McDonald's specific thing.

Can you acknowledge the fact that HOTTER liquids can create more substantial burns than LESS HOT liquids?

I know that I was never burned by the coffee from that McDonald's, and I know that that McDonald's drive through has a very steep drive-through.

Again...did you spill the coffee?  Can you acknowledge the fact that the car was not moving and the woman was not the driver?

Therefore, I know that you can get burned by coffee, and I know that if you put a glass of liquid between your knees while on a steep incline, you are likely to spill that coffee.

I know that there have been very very few reports of burns from McDonald's coffee.

Do you know that McDonalds had, on average, the same amount of coffee burn cases (and the same degree of burns) than other restaurants?  Can you show this?  Will you acknowledge than the few accident cases McDonalds had could have been WORSE (on average) because their coffee was served hotter than comparable restaurants?

Therefore, getting burned was the woman's own fault.

The jury noted that the woman was partly at fault.  However, had the coffee been served at the suggested temperature (and the industry standard) then her burns would have been much less severe.  The McDonalds executives even admitted that they CHOSE to serve at a higher temperature and pay for injuries because they determined that to be more cost-effective than lowering the serving temperature!!!

Here's a comparable example.

It is generally required that dark stairways be lit.  If they are not, the owner of such a stairway is likely to be found liable for damages resulting in a fall on those dark stairs.

Using your logic, such a lawsuit would be frivolous because YOU walk down those same stairs everyday and you KNOW that stairs can be dangerous AND you never fell.

Add in that the stairs are intentionally slanted and it starts to be comparable.

Does it say anywhere that the slant of the drive caused the cup to spill?  The car was at a stop...

or so says the woman who sued for millions of dollars, and God knows she'd have no reason to lie about that.

I mean, come on.

Does it say anywhere that the slant of the drive caused the cup to spill?  The car was at a stop...

or so says the woman who sued for millions of dollars, and God knows she'd have no reason to lie about that.

I mean, come on.

She sued for medical costs.  As near as I can tell, the punitive damages are entirely up to the jury to determine.  So she sued for the cost of repairing herself.