Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Do You Know the Full Story Behind the Infamous McDonald’s

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
kas125 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-26-11 11:55 PM
Original message
Do You Know the Full Story Behind the Infamous McDonald’s
Do You Know the Full Story Behind the Infamous McDonald’s Coffee Case and How Corporations Used it to Promote Tort Reform?

Stella Liebeck made national headlines in 1992 when she sued McDonald’s after spilling a scalding cup of hot coffee on her lap. The lawsuit had the whole country talking. But what most people do not know is that Liebeck suffered third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body and never fully recovered. And most people do not know that corporations have spent millions of dollars distorting her story to promote tort reform. Liebeck’s case is featured in the documentary Hot Coffee, which premiered at the Sundance Film Festival on Monday.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/1/25/do_you_know_the_full_story
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-26-11 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. Some of it I knew
Not all of what you posted

I did know McDonald's had been received several warnings prior to the incident
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheMadMonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #1
359. True enough. It also had feedback from other customers, who's drivethrough...
...coffees were exactly the right temperature by they time they arrived at their destination.

Common sense applies. I ALWAYS assume that hot beverages are made with boiling water. In fact make my TEA with tepid water and you'd better hope it's tepid enough, because you'll be getting it back sans cup.

A car (automobile) is not: a coffee lounge; reading lounge; beauty parlour; desk; dinner table; etc. It is a ton or two of metal and glass moving at lethal speeds. And anything you are doing that is not devoted to keeping it pointed in the right direction increases an already high risk of death or serious injury to you and those around you.

What next? Sueing Bosch after being rear ended mid self-trepanation. Or perhaps Ford for not puting a warning against the practice on the rearview mirror?

Check out Randy Cassingham's Stella Awards web page http://www.stellaawards.com/ for the other side of the story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-26-11 11:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. She had third degree burns
I mention to anyone who cites that as reason we should not allow every lawsuit...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinboy3niner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. She also went through multiple, painful operations
This was not at all the frivolous case it was made out to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #5
12. If I remember her groin was damaged the worst
Yikes....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:57 AM
Response to Reply #12
30. It's because she put the darn coffee cup in between her legs.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 02:59 AM by LisaL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:29 AM
Response to Reply #30
39. yeah and NOBODY else ever does that!
right? right?


:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backtomn Donating Member (424 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #39
129. They do.....and .....
they are supposed to be responsible adults.

People text message while driving, which in most cases in NOT illegal.....but is extremely silly and dangerous. If they get in an accident, it is the car's fault??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #129
150. Why did a jury of her peers rule in her favor?
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #129
167. The jury assigned 25% of the blame to her, but 75% to McD's for the scalding temperature.
You do realize that the temperature of the coffee was high enough to cause 3rd degree burns in a couple of seconds, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #129
204. The car did not heat something to 187 degrees in order to avoid washing a coffee pot
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 04:35 PM by Iris
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #204
228. when i make instant coffee
i put on a kettle, wait till it whistles, and the pour it into the mug with the instant coffee. i do the same for instant hot chocolate. the water is about 212 degrees when i pour it. i then know that it has to cool. when getting coffee at a mcdonalds i could easily imagine that it would be as hot as their hot chocolate, hell people who order tea get a cup of water that just boiled and then put a tea bag in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #39
324. Hey, now... would you spoil someone's fun at being terminally SUPERIOR?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #324
325. sure would! (Because being terminally superior is MY job!)
lol!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #325
408. I bow to your superior....
Humor!

:hug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #30
52. Missing the POINT. The LOCATION wasn't the issue; the COFFEE TEMP was.
She could've burned her mouth and lips; her hands, if it spilled thereon; etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pansypoo53219 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #52
102. mcd's
coffee is horribly hot and even after 5 or 6 little 1/2 + 1/2s it's still fucking hot. i had to add ICE to make it bearable. plus it sucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonAnn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:17 PM
Original message
It it had burned a man's penis and required skin grafts, it would be considered important!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madmax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
132. +10
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
okieinpain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
180. funny. n/t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
328. Yep, the sacred peni! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
335. You got it, sistah!
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedCloud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
356. Or on America's funniest Home videos.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #30
55. In other words, you are unfamiliar with the case. Check. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #55
206. Hey! This is America! Every opinion counts, no matter how uniformed the opinionated is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #206
239. The justice system has its faults
but that, fortunately, isn't one of them except in rare, dumb judge instances.

Since I work in the field, I take much comfort in that! :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #30
90. It doesn't matter. If the coffee hadn't been too hot, it wouldn't have caused 3rd degree burns.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 11:36 AM by Pithlet
I was serving on a jury once, and the break room had one of those industrial coffee machines that makes very hot coffee. And I'd spilled some on my legs right after I'd poured myself some. It caused minor burns, like a bad sun burn on the tops of my legs. It didn't cause 3rd degree burns that required skin grafts. There was no reason for that coffee to be that hot. McDonalds knew about it beforehand and had been warned about it and told to cool the temperature of their coffee to safer temps and didn't do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:41 AM
Original message
I agree and if she had been involved in a wreck it may have made no difference if the coffee
was in a holder, she could've still been scalded.

There is no reason for coffee being sold to a driving public to be that hot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
196. when i make myself coffee i know that it is hot
if someone gives me a cup at their house i know it is hot

i still do not see how people expect to buy coffee that is not boiling hot like it is when we put on a kettle and make tea or coffee at our houses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #196
211. Many on the jury thought as you did ('[ve studied the case), Then the facts
were presented and they awarded her 14 million.

Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1monster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #211
245. No. The jury awarded her $2.7 million or two days profit on coffee sales only in
punitive damages.

(The jury was trying to send McDonalds a message about ignoring the saftey of their coffee buying customers. They were angry at McDonalds arrogant attitude toward those injured by the high temperature of the coffee. McDonalds lawyers came to court armed with a list of seven hundred people who had been injured by the high temperatured coffee, stating that 700 people were "statistically insignificant." First problem for that list is the the plaintiff's lawyer had handled another McDonalds hot coffee injury case -- and his former client's name was not on that list.)

The judge reduced the punitive damages to three times the damages award to $480,000.

The corporate spin program went to work on distorting this award immediately. We were told that the original award was $29,000,000 and the woman exaggerated her injuries and that SHE alone was responsible for her injuries, never even acknowledging even the coffee cup (styrofoam) was softened by the heat of the coffee. We were never told the seriousness of her injuries which required several surgeries and many skin grafts.

And the reason for the distortion was to sway public opinion for tort reform. If the corporate world had their way, there would be no torts at all, but they'll compromise and support a tort reform bill which restricts tort awards to no more than $100,000. And when it comes to medical bills, $100,000 is just a drop in the bucket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #211
358. Maybe if McDonald's had enough money to pay for a good lawyer
they could have gotten justice. It's a shame they were unable to defend themselves against such obviously ridiculous claims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #196
219. Coffee is not boiling hot. By the time boiling water goes through the grounds, by the time its temp
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 05:08 PM by uppityperson
is further decreased by the cooler temp of the pot, by the time the temp is further decreased by the cooler temp of the cup, no, it isn't boiling.

Pour boiling water in a cup and voila, it is no longer boiling unless the cup and air is also 212. By letting the tea bag (or coffee) sit to brew, the temp is further decreased.

There is a big difference between "wow, that cup of drink is boiling hot" and having a cup that is boiling hot. Rather like there is a difference between "I'm starving, what's for dinner" and truly starving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #219
220. when i make instant coffee
or tea i put a kettle on until it boils then pour it in the cup with the instant coffee or teabag in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #220
222. Which cools the liquid considerably.
By the time it makes it to your mouth it might be 160 degrees.

And that pot is designed to hold hot liquid, as opposed to a styrofoam cup.

And that pot isn't being hovered directly over your legs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #222
234. ???
i put a KETTLE on the stove, it boils, i then pour the boiling water into a coffee mug with hot chocolate or instant coffee mix. I stir, i watch the boiling stop as i pour it, true, but if i sip that drink within the first couple of minutes i will burn the shit out of my mouth. and you are correct, i dont put shit that hot between my legs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #234
238. You just answered your own question of why McD's is at fault.
To quote:
but if i sip that drink within the first couple of minutes i will burn the shit out of my mouth.
I'm glad one of the victim blamers here actually admits this. Now tell me, when you purchase coffee from ANYWHERE, it's supposed to be ready to serve and drink, right? Go to Starbucks, buy a venti no-foam latte, sip immediately and enjoy. That's a fast-food stand-by, served ready-to-consume. That expectation was not met, and the consequences were devastating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #238
263. when i buy coffee, tea, and hot chocolate here in France
it is so hot that i have to wait to drink it. when you order tea they brink you a steaming hot tea kettle that they have to pour by holding with a cloth because the pot is so hot. when you get hot chocolate in the little cafés you can see that it is often steaming hot and you have to wait a couple of minutes to drink it. hot drinks are things that you cannot consume until they cool down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #263
264. And that is typical? How you expect it?
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 06:08 PM by uppityperson
At a walk in, sit down restaurant? I've bought coffee at McDo's in France and no, it wasn't 187 degrees (yes, kids went there for a treat) (the shame!).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #264
279. at a café
the french version of a quick way to get a drink, mcdonalds probably has the same guidelines about temperature all over the world now.... or while getting the great mint tea in north african restaurants
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #279
283. You think it should be expected for a fast-food container to cause 3rd degree burns?
I've had McDo's coffee in France and it wasn't hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:07 PM
Original message
By your tea example you're talking about sit down restaraunts, not fast-food.
Apples v. oranges. Try again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:17 PM
Response to Original message
281. tea or tea,
fast food or not what the hell is your point??? when i go to the kebab stand here i get french fries, they come right out of the fryer, i will burn myself if i eat them... what the hell are you on about with fast food?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #281
285. you are comparing apples with oranges. The comparison isn't valid.
You think it should be expected for a fast-food container to cause 3rd degree burns?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #285
295. yes, food is cooked, it gets hot and can burn you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #295
297. You think it should be expected for a fast-food container to cause 3rd degree burns?
You continue to answer but not answer the question. You think it should be expected for a fast-food container to cause 3rd degree burns?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #297
303. for the container????
the container is not hot, the coffee inside is. how did the container cause the burn?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #303
309. You know full well what is meant. Stop dodging and answer the question.
Should liquid in a fast-food container be capable of causing 3rd degree burns on contact?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #309
315. yes,
food is hot, i like getting coffee or tea, letting it cool and i know that i shouldnt spill any of it. i also never drink hot drinks in cars... i also have not been to fucking mcdonalds for over 8 years....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #315
319. I can't believe you said yes.
You actually think that coffee served to customers should be able to cause nearly instantaneous 3rd degree burns? It seems clear: You believe that responsibility is one-sided, and that there should be no expectation of safety. The CPSC disagrees heartily with you, as do most citizens of western democracies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #319
323. Way.
Thank you for getting him to answer. Incredible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 05:34 AM
Response to Reply #319
386. most people in my group of friends
think that hot liquids can burn you. when i expect safety from companies it is by them not putting lead into kids toys because we expect kids to chew shit....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #386
417. I sincerely doubt any of those people think that hot liquids can or should cause 3rd degree burns.
See the picture below and tell me if you think your friends expect that to happen if they spill something...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #281
296. I already explained it. Served ready-to-consume.
The expectation is there in the name. Maybe in France with your incredible lunch breaks you have time to do whatever the fuck you want on lunch. Order 3 courses, wait for stuff to cool, smoke a joint, and bone a hooker for all I know...The point is, here in the US, we have this thing we call "fast-food" because Americans get shit in the way of time for lunch, and it is a national expectation that food at these restaurants be served ready-to-consume. There's no "hot plate" warning. There's no "you might wanna let that cool" because there's no time. It's actually REGULATION that fries NOT come straight out of the fryer and into the fry case. They can't. They must first be deposited into (what we used to call) the fry-roof, where they are seasoned if necessary, mixed with a utensil to shake out unwanted detritus like extra grease, and THEN placed into a fry container. By that time they've had a chance to cool to a temperature that will not cause 3rd degree burns.

I'm sorry if you just don't get it, but the fact is that fast-food restaurants are held to a different standard than, say, my favorite steakhouse, which is allowed to place dangerous items in front of its customers with a verbal warning. Furthermore, there is simply no reason that ANYTHING served in ANY restaurant should cause 3rd degree burns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #296
300. exactly. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 05:52 AM
Response to Reply #296
389. just a typical 2 hour lunch
some people only have an hour but most people get a 2 hour break.....


when we only have one hour we still have time to walk to the cafeteria where we work and eat or walk to a cafe.

there are no verbal warnings here when i buy a flaming plate serverd on fire (they burn off the rum in front of your eyes) it is implied that an adult will understand that heat burns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #389
418. So you admit that you're comparing apples to oranges.
It's a step in the right direction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #263
375. I guess there's not a lot of drive-thru coffee, then

I've spent plenty of time in France.

Yes, even at the gas stations on the highway, if you are having coffee, the expectation is that you are going to stand around at a little table.

That is very different from a business model where a ready-to-consume beverage is handed to the driver of a car for consumption by persons in a vehicle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #220
223. Is the cup 212 degrees? Is the spoon you stir with? Is the air?No? Then there you are.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 05:17 PM by uppityperson
all of those things will decrease the temperature. Check it with a thermometer and report back.

Here is another experiment. Pour the boiling hot water directly into your mouth. Can you tell the difference? Oh, have 911 programed into your phone before doing so. And an ice cube in your hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #223
226. and the coffee they gave her
was somehow not colled by a spoon, or the air or the cup?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:20 PM
Response to Reply #226
227. Of course it was it was 187 degrees, in a styrofoam cup. That was the issue.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 05:20 PM by uppityperson
wtf?

It was also hotter than the recommended temp. Hotter than was expected or recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bighart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #219
413. Recomended brewing temp for coffee is 194 to 204 degrees f.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #413
426. That may be the temperature of the water going INTO the grounds,
but not the coffee coming out. That's how heat transfer works. And BTW I don't see where you got that stat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bighart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #426
427. From coffeeresearch.org
"The goal is to brew coffee at a temperature between 195-205°F." so I was actually low by one degree. Yes the grounds will initially cool the water some but the longer the hot water is running through the less heat the liquid will loose, that's how heat transfer works.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #427
428. Before you claim that the coffee you drink is anywhere close to that temp,
you might want to research drip and pour rates of heat loss, or failing that just grab a damn candy thermometer and check it right before you drink it. Coffee, much like most "hot" beverages, is generally served at 160 degrees Fahrenheit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bighart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #428
431. But you see I did not reference either serving or holding temps which
I agree are lower. I specifically referenced brewing temp. If the coffee she was served was in the process of or had just finished brewing it was hotter than it would have been had it been setting at the recommended holding temp of 185 degrees or the recommended serving temp of between 155 and 175 degrees. If you don't think the grounds would heat up to close to the temp of the water pouring over/through them during the brewing process I would suggest you grab a thermometer and test them close to the end of a brewing cycle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bighart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #428
432. And by the way I am not saying McDonald's was faultless in this situation
I think it would have been, at the very least, the courteous thing to do to tell her that the coffee had just finished brewing and may be hotter than normal if that was the case. I believe this situation was one of shared responsibility and McDonald's owns a large share of that responsibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maraya1969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #196
360. I really don't think you've experienced extremely hot coffee. I have to
leave the Starbucks sitting for a good 5 minutes before I can drink it or get some ice cubes. I can tell by quickly touching it with my tongue that if I took a sip it would burn my mouth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:29 PM
Response to Reply #196
364. How do you make "boiling hot coffee"?

Drip coffeemakers do not put out coffee that hot.

If you are using a coffee press, then you have to let it sit for a while.

If you are using a Melitta cone, you have to run it through the grounds and that contact cools it off.

You cannot make "boiling hot coffee" unless you are heating it up from the temperature at which it was prepared, because if you start with boiling water, and make coffee, you don't have a boiling hot liquid anymore through any reasonable process of MAKING coffee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 06:10 AM
Response to Reply #364
392. i put instant coffee powder into a cup
boil a kettle and pour it in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #392
415. I said "reasonable process"
Edited on Fri Jan-28-11 02:09 PM by jberryhill
"Instant coffee" is no way to live. However, as a benchmark, what is the mass ratio of powder to water that you are using.

One does not "make coffee" with "instant coffee". One reconstitutes coffee which has been dehydrated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #30
151. Why did a jury of 12 adults rule for the plaintiff?
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #151
178. Keep asking!
I hope you get an answer!

:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #151
201. lack of personal responsibility
a jury full of people who think that we as adults do not need to be responsible for our actions.

When most of us lose our jobs it is not our fault, we are laid off, so i am not talking about the kind of personal responsibility reagan talked about.

I am talking about the idea that we as adults should know that coffee can be boiling hot if just made or kept hot and that if something is steaming hot perhaps we should not put it between our legs. to me it would be like someone suing a gun maker because they shot themselves while putting a gun into their waistband.

sue tobacco because they targeted underage people and lied about cancer evidence, fine

sue a tobacco company because you burned yourself with a cigarette, no!

sue when faulty material, thus negligence of a company, harms you in some way, fine

sue when you get burned because of your own poor jugement....no suing.

when you see steam coming off of something you know it is hot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #201
213. The jury found Ms. Liebeck partially at fault and reduced punitive damages by 20%
damages accoordingly (by 20%).

She STILL was awarded millions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #213
225. I know
and from what i have been reading recently i still do not understand why the jury awarded her anything. i dont understand how her negligence would only partially be responsible. i dont really understand why mcdonalds would be responsible for having the coffee too hot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #225
233. Then check #215.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #233
237. +1.
I'm willing to bet it won't sway them at all, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #225
235. See the graph below--and they'd had over SEVEN HUNDRED claims
and served their coffee well above industry standards.

Anyone who excuses McDonald's simply isn't aware of the vast amount of evidence against McDonald's. Most of the jury felt as you did going in but changed their minds when they saw photographic evidence of her burns.

Preponderance of the evidence is the rule in US torts, and even the Grand McD couldn't beat this one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stardust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #225
367. Has anyone mentioned the reason the coffee was so hot? That McD's
pencil pushers had determined how much more coffee they could get by using water that was much hotter than usually used in the coffee brewing process? Greed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bighart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #367
433. Got a link for that assertation?
Recommended brewing temp for coffee is 195 to 205 degrees f.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stardust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 11:53 PM
Response to Reply #433
434. Heard it on the radio many years ago. No link, sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rsdsharp Donating Member (516 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #213
242. She wasn't awarded millions
The judgment actually entered by the court was $640,000. The compensatory award of $200,000 was reduced by 20% due to Mrs. liebeck's fault, and the judge reduced the punitive damages from 2.7 million to $480,000 -- three times the actual compensatory judgment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #242
250. True--but in my recollection the JURY award was several million and the judge reduced it
of his own volition.

I have many documents from the case but they are in storage. I know the final award (after the 20% at-fault reduction) was 480K.

I don't mind people keeping me honest--I think we are both correct in this case, however. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rsdsharp Donating Member (516 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #250
262. I believe the jury's punitive damage award
was 2.7 million. Typically the judge grants a motion for remittitur by the defendant rather than reducing a jury award sua sponte. It can, and does happen however, and I'm not sure what prompted the reduction in this case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markbark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #30
158. Indeed
...and spilling coffee on yourself should incur dry cleaning bills, NOT plastic surgery bills.
Mickey-D's had been warned repeatedly that the serving temp was too high.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #30
354. So, one should expect to get third degree burns from
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 08:57 PM by mzmolly
take out coffee? What would the same cup of coffee have done to her face, mouth and esophagus etc.? :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backtomn Donating Member (424 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #12
124. With respect to the injured.....
.....she put the hot coffee between her legs and drove off. Is that McDonald's fault?? I know of a lot of people that buy McDonald's coffee because it is good AND HOT. I have a problem with a lot of issues of corporate control of government, but this isn't one of them. I feel sorry for her, but she did not deserve $8 million in damages.......correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that was her initial reward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smokey nj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #124
128. She was a PASSENGER in a PARKED car.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backtomn Donating Member (424 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #128
130. I don't think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #130
131. You disagree with the facts? Did you read the OP's article?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #131
205. what? you expect someone to read and get facts before juding another human being?
jeez....


:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smokey nj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #130
133. You're wrong. Her nephew was behind the wheel and he had pulled into a spot
so they could get organized before driving away. Consult the link provided in the OP, this information is there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NickB79 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #130
165. Well, three of the four words you wrote are correct, at least. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #165
173. Isn't a 75% success rate considered pretty good?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #130
366. Facts are not opinions - what you "think" is not what happened

But do present Exhibit A of how this case has been distorted for corporate purposes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #124
136. Her reward was based on ONE DAY'S coffee profits
for McDonalds.

And your FAIL has been noted by others as to the facts of the case.

Way to push RW tort reform talking points, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rsdsharp Donating Member (516 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #124
140. You are wrong
As others have pointed out, the car was not moving at the time of the spill. She put the cup between her legs to take off the lid. This was necessary because McDonalds corporate policy required the stores to serve cream and sugar on the side. The only way to add them was to take the lid off the cup -- in her case, in a car with no cup holders.

You are equally wrong about the damage award. The original compensatory award was $200,000. This was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found her to be 20% at fault. The original punitive damage award was 2.7 million -- two days coffe sales for McDonalds. This was reduced by the judge to $480,000 (three times compensatory damages). Therefore, the orginal judgment was $640,000, not 8 million. McDonalds settled while the appeal was pending so she probably received less than that. But even if they paid the amount of the judgment, her attorneys would have likely taken either 1/3 or 2/5 of the net amount remaining after paying expenses, which would have included expert fees, filing fees, service costs, and deposition costs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #140
240. in her case, in a car with no cup holders
well maybe she should have gotten off of her lazy ass and gone into the restaurant to prepare her coffee. that would have wasted what??? 1 minute??? less if the line was shorter inside than at the drive through......

how is mc donalds responsible for the fact that the car she was in had no cup holders.

when i make tea i put a teabag into a mug and pour boiling water on it. when i give it to my friends they see all the steam and know that it is hot so they, as an anyone boiling water to make pasta would do, avoid spilling it or holding it where it could spill on them in order to not burn themselves. i think that is just part of being an adult. you see steam, you feel the heat of the coffee, you try to pull up a little tab on the lid to put in cream while the cup is between your legs, dont pull right, and the fucking coffee spills i dont see how mcdonalds is responsible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #240
243. Maybe you as well would benefit from the exercise in #232.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #243
265. that would be negligence on the part of mcdonalds
they hand you a cup that is not shut and it is normal to think that it is shut. it is not normal to think that there is not a burn possibility from hot drinks spilling, it is normal to think that the container of hot liquid be closed. and you still didnt explain why she couldnt have just gone in for her coffee?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #265
272. You think it should be expected for a fast-food container to cause 3rd degree burns?
And your "could have gone in" dodge is pointless. If you think people should go in to get their coffee then maybe it shouldn't be served in the drive-thru to begin with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #272
287. if they come in a car with no cupholders
they should have thought about where to place the hot coffee BEFORE buying it..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #287
302. More dodging.
It's the degree of the burns and the crippling nature of the injuries that's the problem here, and it could have happened to her easily whether or not her car had cup holders. Your point is pointless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #287
310. They did. It is not typical for coffee from a fast food place be able to cause 3rd degree burns
Do you even KNOW what a 3rd degree burn is? 1st degree is pink skin, like sunburn or running warm water over it. 2nd degree results in blisters. 3rd degree goes through the skin, can damage fat, bones, underlying structures.

They were not following recommendations by giving out this hot of liquid. Yes, accidents happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #240
244. McD's had over 700 claims about this. The temp was hotter than it was supposed to be
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 05:43 PM by uppityperson
McD's was responsible for serving liquid at a scalding hotter than to be expected temperature. Hotter than their guidelines. Capable of scalding the skin off someone if it were spilled on them.

That is what they are responsible for. They knew it was too hot. They continued to serve it anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #244
267. so adults are not to be trusted with hot liquid?
how in the hell would this woman make pasta?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #267
274. McD's had over 700 claims about this. The temp was hotter than it was supposed to be
McD's was responsible for serving liquid at a scalding hotter than to be expected temperature. Hotter than their guidelines. Capable of scalding the skin off someone if it were spilled on them.

That is what they are responsible for. They knew it was too hot. They continued to serve it anyway. They were negligent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #267
280. You think it should be expected for a fast-food container to cause 3rd degree burns?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #280
284. yes, food is cooked, it gets hot,
and i teach my 3 year old that hot food can burn....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #284
286. You think it should be expected for a fast-food container to cause 3rd degree burns?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #286
299. the food, not the damned container
the coffee spilled because the woman lifted the lid and the pressure of her legs crushed the cup, the hot coffee was too hot, i wouldnt put hot coffee that close to my balls for anything much less for lack of a cupholder
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #299
304. The coffee spilled because the excessive temp make the styrofoam soft and pliable.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 06:26 PM by uppityperson
You think it should be expected for a food or drink in a fast-food container to cause 3rd degree burns?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #304
306. well no shit
plastic bends more with heat, you never realized that??? the container didnt burn, the person burned herself. as an adult we should know that hot liquids can scald, that cups are weakened when hot liquids are poured into them, and that we must be careful when opening the lid because if we are putting pressure on the cup from the sides the cup can deform and slosh out liquid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #306
312. She wasn't scalded, she was burned.
Her flesh was literally burned from her thighs down into the muscle tissue. No coffee served through a fast-food window should be able to do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #124
163. I dunno, if my groin got burned and it was due to a faulty cup lid
I'd sue

Of course, I would hope McDonalds would sue the cup manufacturer for giving them dangerous goods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #124
231. She wasn't driving; she was the passenger
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #124
355. And if she would have drank the coffee it would have magically
cooled down?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laundry_queen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:36 AM
Response to Reply #124
384. Sweet jesus
First, she did not drive off.

Second, does a customer not have an expectation, that, even if the coffee is hot, it should not be so hot that when the lid is taken off of the cup that the cup NOT collapse? If the heat of the coffee has weakened the cup to the point of collapse because of presure on its side (legs or hands, it does not matter) then that coffee might be too hot. If that coffee, served in a ready to drink container, can cause third degree burns that require skin grafts, in a matter of seconds, that coffee might be too hot. When you, as a business, have been warned numerous times and have had lawsuits already dealing with this matter, you should realize the coffee you are serving might be too hot.

I'm not sure what the legal measurement is in the US but here in Canada it is the 'reasonable' person - that means someone who is above average in their reasoning - and what a reasonable person would think or do. A reasonable person would likely conclude that a collapsing cup, third degree burns and numerous other instances and warnings means that the coffee is too hot and that McDonalds is being negligent. The jury also found her 25% at fault and I must commend the jury - they made the right decision. It's too bad there seems to be a lack of 'reasonable' people in society these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-26-11 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. Yep. And it's disgusting.
Thanks for posting the link, too.

--d!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kas125 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. You're welcome. Just a couple days ago someone on DU
mentioned this as a frivolous lawsuit so I thought it was time to set the story straight here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojeoux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #6
16. Good on you!!!
We have to constantly bust through the film of bullshit spread out all over our country and culture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #16
105. If only children were issued Bullshit detectors on their first day at school.
The World would be a better place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #105
181. It should be required studies for all...
We need an anti-lemming law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
handmade34 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #181
301. I took a business law
class last year and we looked at this case... the public story has very little to do with the rality of the case... it is time for people to quit believing everything they are told by corporations and the media
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:30 PM
Response to Reply #6
241. Agree, it's all part of rw propaganda and its destructive ... always --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gold Metal Flake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
4. If the media had a liberal bias...
... the documentary Hot Coffee would be on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
7. Oh, don't let facts spoil a good story
It's so much easier and accessible to simply assert that poor McDonald's can't even beat a simple tort claim, is unable to hire competent legal representation, and doesn't have the financial wherewithal to mount a decent defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
8. I knew some of it, especially the temp of the coffee--and her burns. having suffered third-degree
burns myself (though not through any corporate negligence) I can still only imagine how much she suffered.

yet another reason I never set foot in a mickeyd's
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawson Leery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:06 AM
Response to Original message
9. I recall the details of this story.
Also, Toby KKKeith is truely a cockroach
From the interview: "Toby Keith has a song out right now called the "American Ride." And it says, "Spill a cup of coffee, make a million dollars."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
10. As I recall she actually received very little money once they finally cut her a check
The judge reduced the award on appeal, and after the lawyers took their cut I think she just had enough to pay her medical bills and that was it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
120. The final amount was undisclosed. A tort lawyer I know (a very, very good one, I might add)
suspects that the plaintiff threatened an appeal and McD's knew it would lose and didn't want the REAL story to come out and so they returned to the negotiating table.

Said lawyer says he's certain Ms. Liebeck got a respectable amount from the settlement--but in the beginning, she only asked McD's to cover her medical expenses and they refused.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnneD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #120
224. I remember when hubby had this lady (a Doc) run a red light....
and almost T-bones him. We suspect she was on the phone, didn't pay attention and hit him. As we found out that evening, he had a broken arm. Now as a musician with gigs and lessons, and he was on his way to start producing a CD later that week, that was a major setback.

All we wanted, as they say in legal parlance, was to be made whole. They wanted to declare it 50-50. We had to fight to get her insurance to do right thing. We had a witness, but they tried to wear us down. We had to got through two lawyers. Our second one took it because he was an armature musician and understood. It was settled out of court but I would have loved to have gone. Seems one of hubby's student's father worked in the clinic with this Doc and heard her talking about. She was talking about how she really had run the red light. The father was so upset as they work in research and he said it was an integrity issue and he would gladly be a witness if we needed. To make matters worse, they all worked at the same hospital.

We totaled up the days off work (he is a guard and needs use of his arm) so he took sick leave, his missed performances and lessons, his car-lucky for her it was a beater car, the medical cost and the lawyers fees. Out of the 15K, we got 1/3, lawyer got 1/3 and the doc got 1/3. So for almost the year of hassle, we got 5K. We hardly got rich and we would have been better if it never happened. No lottery for us.

Tort does not need reforming. Some of these folks and I am talking Corps, need to take responsibility for their actions. McD knew the coffee was to hot and BP knew they they were taking a short cut because it was cheap, and Ford knew their Pinto gas tank design was faulty, and Toyota knew their break system was faulty, and I could go on. The Court system is there to address grievances as it should be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:18 AM
Response to Original message
11. I remember falling for the media version.
Later finding out the truth.

Who knew the media was full of shit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hlthe2b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
13. Amazing.. Glad this documentary is getting released.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lifesbeautifulmagic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:04 AM
Response to Original message
14. I don't need to go to the link - I did a study on this case
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 01:05 AM by lifesbeautifulmagic
for one of my law classes --

Another fact that may or may not have been brought in your link is - there were many burnt by coffee cases brought against Micky Ds, and one that was in the pipeline concerned a very, very elderly women (like in her mid 80's or 90's), who was burned so bad she needed to have skin grafts, and died as a result of complications from the surgery. It has been theorized that one of the reasons Micky D's did the full court public relations press was to defuse and minimize this case. You know, dump a million into public relations, save a couple of million in judgment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pacalo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:06 AM
Response to Original message
15. This is the first time I've read all the important details of this lawsuit.
I'm guessing Mickey D's list of 700+ scalded patrons at the time of trial will never get anywhere near that high, that they put the safety of their patrons ahead of what's more efficient for them. Their gall of taking that list to trial for their own defense to is astounding.

A 79-year-old has very tender skin & doesn't heal well; poor woman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slampoet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:15 AM
Response to Original message
17. How much would you want for Burnt Genitalia?
It always made me sick when gopheads used to trot this out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #17
56. The jury pretty much turned when they saw the photos of the damage. I played Liebeck in a mock trial
but didn't see the photos. I've read some jurors recollections of them, though--they were pretty much horrified.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:17 AM
Response to Original message
18. Also - that particular McDonald's had received many, many complaints about the scalding hot coffee
and failed to do anything about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #18
118. This is an important point that has been overlooked
they were repeatedly warned that the coffee did NOT need to be that hot in order to be appealing to customers, and would have been safer if they reduced the temp. a few degrees, but they CHOSE to continue to put customers at risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1monster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #118
260. That was part of the hype. McD's did not keep the coffee that hot for flavor reasons.
They kept the coffee at 187 degrees so that they did not have to throw out hours old coffee and make a new pot when coffee sales were slow. That saved them big bucks and kept the coffee profits unnaturally high. The high temperature kept the coffee from breaking down and becoming bitter when left sitting on the coffee warmer for longer than a half hour.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinboy3niner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #260
298. And there were other $$$ reasons...
McD's was able to save money because higher temp allowed them to use a cheaper coffee, and to cut the number of free refills served:

.... According to the evidence, the company knew about burn hazards and continued to serve coffee hot not to please the consumers, but to save money. Serving coffee hot allowed McDonald's to "get away with a cheaper grade of coffee and cut down on the number of free refills they had to give away" (Riba). McDonald's coffee case forced the company to reexamine its policy and since then McDonald's serves coffee at a temperature low enough not to cause immediate third-degree burns.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2545263/liebeck_v_mcdonalds_restaurants_or.html?cat=17

(Credit to blondeatlast for the link.) :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #298
429. that's exactly why cos. that do this have to be hit with BIG penalties
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emsimon33 Donating Member (904 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #18
141. I was one who complained
because I had young nephews at the time who wanted to eat there. I finally had them fill the cup 1/4 of the way with ice and then add the coffee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzteris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #18
439. there were numerous cases across the country
of scalds - including children! Corporate McDonald's decided it was cheaper to "settle" out of court than make the change.

Depraved indifference to human suffering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishwax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:22 AM
Response to Original message
19. I remember reading a comic book that explained all of the background -- wish I could find that again
but I don't remember what it was called.

The documentary sounds interesting. I look forward to seeing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:26 AM
Response to Original message
20. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:08 AM
Response to Original message
21. Yes, she was badly burned. But it was her own stupid fault.
I'm sorry that she was injured, but why should McDonalds be liable for the fact that she *chose* to place a hot cup of coffee on her lap?

Her lawsuit stated that the coffee was "unreasonably dangerous" and "defectively manufactured". Bullshit. Coffee is *supposed* to be hot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:12 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. She needed skin grafts. Only an idiot company hands something that hot to someone in a car.
'Coffee is supposed to be hot'--- 187 degrees hot? Why? Who the fuck wants it that hot?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:22 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. Me. I like my coffee hot. But I put it in the cupholder, I don't prop it on my lap. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. I like my french fries hot. I wish they'd let me pull em outta the fryer with my bare hands
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #24
60. LOL!
:spray:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #24
66. +1 SNAP! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deutsey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #24
100. LOL
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:56 AM
Response to Reply #23
29. You want your coffee 187 degrees hot? No shit. ...Really?
Yeah, I'm all for hot coffee, too. But there is such a thing as "too hot".

I guess you didn't read the article. They didn't have a cupholder and it melted the Styrofoam cup it was in. In fact, Styrofoam melts at 187 degrees, and the McDonald's manual stated that coffee must be kept at about 187 degrees- despite the fact that, again, the Styrofoam they put the coffee in will melt at that temperature. The cup basically fell apart on this woman, leaving her with 3rd degree burns over 16% of her body.

I know, actual details are pesky-- it's much easier to deal with cliches, like the 'lawsuit happy lady who wanted to sue because she spilled coffee on herself'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:36 AM
Response to Reply #29
40. Yes. I like my coffee hot. No shit. really.
Especially when I am driving. The hotter it is when it is served, the longer it stays hot as I sip it driving on the I-95.

And propping a scalding hot beverage on your lap because you don't have a cupholder is kind of like sticking a loaded gun down your sweats because you're not wearing a holster, like Plaxico Burress did. I wonder if the "don't blame the victim" crowd extend their sympathies to this guy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gaedel Donating Member (802 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:31 AM
Response to Reply #40
43. Yes
"So long as those unloaded guns
"We keep beside the bed
"Blow off by obvious accident
"The lucky owner's head."

Rudyard Kipling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #40
114. According to the article, the cup collapsed. So if she had needed skin grafts on her hands and arms
instead of her thighs and genitalia, would that make a difference to you?

I'll be honest- I don't grasp the fun of getting a beverage that you have to wait 15 minutes before you can drink (or even "sip") without it burning the crap out of your lips and tongue. But to each his own, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dems_rightnow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #29
44. Styrofoam does NOT melt at 187 degrees
That story is just wrong. Styrofoam melts at around 240-250 degrees, and can begin to soften at around 212 degrees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeff47 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #44
45. Melting != softening
While it will turn into a liquid at 240 degrees, it loses it's structural strength at a much lower temperature when it softens. Which means it's not going to be an effective cup.

Most people label softening as "melting", but that's not technically accurate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #45
78. The woman took the lead off to put cream into her coffee.
While the cup was in between her legs. Where does it say her cup melted?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #78
108. Responded in wrong place--self-delete. nt
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 12:45 PM by blondeatlast
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #78
110. "The whole cup collapsed."
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 12:47 PM by Warren DeMontague
JUDY LIEBECK: Well, whoever I talk to, they don’t have the right story. So I always ask, "What do you think happened?" What really happened was that my nephew was driving the car, not my mother. They drove into a McDonald’s, got coffee and a meal, drove into the parking lot. There were no cup holders in the car, so my mother steadied the cup between her knees and peeled off the lid. The whole cup collapsed.

The temperature—McDonald’s required that their temperature be held around 187 degrees.

AMY GOODMAN: In a styrofoam cup.

JUDY LIEBECK: In a styrofoam cup. And styrofoam will melt at that temperature. She went to the hospital. We thought, oh, she’s in for observation overnight, no problem. But she was in for eight days. She had third-degree burns. She could not—you could not touch that area. She had to have a sheet held up. She—

AMY GOODMAN: The pictures that are shown in the film are gruesome.




Right there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #110
340. If She Was Only Awarded $480,000
(which I assume was more like $320,000 after legal expenses), that much pulls the rug out from under tort reform advocates.

I don't like see huge multimillion settlements to undeserving parties any more than the next person, but that certainly isn't what happened here.

It's also a warning that no matter what situation you see intended to provoke outrage (from any point of view), it is wise to make sure to understand the whole situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #29
77. Just this morning I boiled the water to make tea.
After reading all these posts, I am not sure people should be allowed to boil the water at home.
After all, water boils at 212 degrees. How fast is that going to make the burn if in contact with the skin? Oh the horror.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #77
79. If you were in the business of passing that boiling tea through small windows ..
... to people in cars, you or your insurance company might engage a few brain-cells and look to mitigate the risk of passing a boiling substance that causes INSTANT skin damage.

Well, maybe your insurance company.

The fact remains McDonalds passed a substance that was unfit for human consumption it its present state AND offered zero chance of escaping serious burns if spilled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #77
81. Do you have a candy thermometer?
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 11:38 AM by merh
If you do, please make some more tea. Then, using your thermometer, determine the temperature of the liquid that you choose to put to your lips to drink, after you have boiled the water and made the tea.

As I understand it, the coffee is served ready to drink, there is no warning label on it advising that it be allowed to cool down.

Please come back and let us know how hot the tea is that you can stand to put to your lips and pass over your tongue and down your throat.

thanks in advance.




Edited to add: BTW, the jury did find that the plaintiff was 25% at fault, that she spilled it on herself - that percentage was taken from her award.

It was the court that determined that McDonalds was negligent and that the jury should determine punitive damages - that is that they be punished for their actions/inactions. The award was what McDonald made in 2 days of coffee sales.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #77
82. Tea. You pour into the cup with the bag and let it sit for a while.
By the time you pick up that cup of tea to drink it it has cooled off considerably.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #82
87. Just think of the dangers while I am pouring the water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #87
122. Obviously, you aren't aware of the difference between first, second, and third degree burns.
Nor do you have any idea whatsoever of the facts of the case--but do keep spouting on anyway...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #87
125. I agree, you sound like you should be careful, what with the reasoning skills you have shown
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #87
143. Just think if Sharon Tate hadn't answered the door.
You're incredible. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maru Kitteh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #87
144. Given the powers of discernment you've demonstrated here - it's a wonder you're still alive.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 01:48 PM by Maru Kitteh
so yeah, do be careful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #144
148. +1 and a LOL on top! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #87
159. Jesus Lisa---
What the fuck is wrong with you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #87
168. Sit down fully clothed and pour 8 oz of boiling water on your pants.
That isn't exactly what happened but close enough. Report back on how you fare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RetroLounge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #87
336. I'm thinking of the dangers of letting you type.
thanks for demonstrating for us.

:eyes:

RL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheilaT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #77
198. And you probably pour the hot water for your tea
into a ceramic cup, which is significantly cooler than the just-boiled water, and quickly cools it down to a drinkable temperature. Styrofoam cups don't cool the way ceramic does.

I can recall getting hot coffee in those styrofoam cups and absolutely hating how very long it took to cool down to where I could consider drinking it, even after a couple of the containers of half and half.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #77
368. How long do you let your tea steep?

Or do you just put the tea in your mouth and drink from the kettle?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #29
266. I think the fact that it's to-go influences the temperature they serve it at.
Nobody would want to drink coffee at that temp, but McDonalds, knowing that people usually take the coffee with them somewhere and knowing that once it leaves the store it is on its way to getting cold, decided to serve it at such a high temperature so that it will stay hot as long as possible. And I do believe they should bear responsibility for the condition of their product.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #266
317. The speculation in the article is that the coffee is kept that hot to maximize shelf life.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 06:36 PM by Warren DeMontague
MY GOODMAN: How do you know it was 187 degrees?

JUDY LIEBECK: That was in McDonald’s manual. Coffee was to be held at all of their facilities at that temperature, worldwide. And the reason for that, we believe, is that the higher the temperature on the coffee, the longer the shelf life of the pot of coffee. So it was a business decision to do that. But it causes irreparable damage. At 142 to 162 degrees, you have 25 seconds to get away from a third-degree burn. It’s not going to happen.


Judging from my experiences with other food and beverage items from McDonald's, I don't think the quality of the products relating to temperature and taste is a real high priority. I've been given burgers that ranged from ice cold to room temperature, so I don't think it's about anything but saving money on having to throw out coffee that goes bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:19 AM
Response to Reply #23
34. DAMN! And I thought it was a conservative thing to blame the victim.
Let's put aside for the moment the fact that this woman did what an incredibly large number of people in this country do, and focus on the real issue. You say you like your coffee hot. Are you even AWARE of what 187 degrees Fahrenheit IS?

Have a look at this graph, and be sure to note the fact that 2nd and 3rd degree burns can happen in far less that 0.5 seconds (almost instantaneously) at that temperature. I would dare you to drink coffee exactly that hot, but I wouldn't wish that kind of pain even on someone dumb enough to take that dare.

BTW: Those various abbreviations are recommended maximum temps for hot water heater settings from different standards organizations. As you may notice, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (those crazy fucks who try to actually protect us from ourselves) recommends a temperature over 35 degrees BELOW the McDonald's coffee in question.

It's one thing to say, without reading the facts, "oh coffee's supposed to be hot, and it burns when you spill it. She was stupid to sue." It's an entirely different thing to be presented with the facts and still say this woman was anything other than a victim.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #23
65. and do you drink your coffee near boiling point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #23
93. Go to the kitchen.
Drink a cup of 187 degree coffee. Then come back.

What a piece of work. The media has done a good job with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #93
99. I can *sip* 187 degree coffee, no problem.
When I used to drink instant coffee as a student, I boiled the kettle and poured the boiling water on the coffee granules. So that would have been close to 212 degrees and I would start *sipping* it almost immediately.

The only time 187 degree coffee is a problem is when some moron decides to prop it on their lap. There's a big difference between small sips and pouring it all over your groin area.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #99
121. Really? Do you understand that the temperature of the coffee (well beyond industry standards)
aggravated her burns to burn completely through her skin and to the underlying muscle and connecting tissue? I've seen the photos.

No, obviously you don't--I'd love to watch you actually drink that 187 degree coffee.

I take that back--there's a reason I didn't go into nursing...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #121
127. Yes I do. Because she propped in in her lap.
Millions of people drink hot coffee every day without getting third degree burns in their groins. Because they are smart enough not to prop the cup of hot coffee on their lap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #127
135. If you drink 187 degree liquid, your mouth and esophagus will be blistered
If you do that for enough yrs, you run a higher change of developing esophageal cancer. Good luck to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #127
149. No, they don't--you don't know the facts in the case--but do go on since I trust you are a medical
professional...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #127
253. Let it go, Nye
I'm sure there's some nail studded underwear waiting for you atop the wood stove anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #99
126. If your lips don't have blisters, no, you don't *sip* 187 degree anything
That temp will cause blisters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #126
177. So the National Coffee Association is incorrect?
Brewed coffee should be enjoyed immediately!

Pour it into a warmed mug or coffee cup so that it will maintain its temperature as long as possible. Brewed coffee begins to lose its optimal taste moments after brewing so only brew as much coffee as will be consumed immediately. If it will be a few minutes before it will be served, the temperature should be maintained at 180 - 185 degrees Fahrenheit. It should never be left on an electric burner for longer than 15 minutes because it will begin to develop a burned taste. If the coffee is not to be served immediately after brewing, it should be poured into a warmed, insulated thermos and used within the next 45 minutes.

http://www.ncausa.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=71

I guess you should let them know they are wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #177
188. "If it will be a few minutes before it is served"
It looks like that temperature is for coffee that's not to be sipped immediately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #188
199. that was a nice case of "self-served"!
lol...proving one's self wrong...priceless! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #177
190. Even McDonald's policy guy testified that they "assumed" that the coffee would not
be consumed immediately--and that that was the excuse they used for keeping the coffee HOTTER THAN THE NCA's RECOMMENDATIONS.

The NCA actually testified at the trial on Ms. Liebeck's behalf--but don't let the facts of this case stop you from spew--I amean, speaking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #177
195. No, you are wrong. "maintained" is different from "sipped". 185 degrees causes burns.
You seriously trust the National Coffee Association? Hahahahahaha

http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/5098.html
Most adults will suffer third-degree burns if exposed to 150 degree water for two seconds.

American Burn Association
http://www.plainfieldfire.org/PDF/BurnSafety/ScaldInjuryEducatorsGuide.pdf
"The severity of a scald injury depends on the temperature to which the skin is exposed and
how long it is exposed. The most common regulatory standard for the maximum temperature
of water delivered by residential water heaters to the tap is 120 degrees Fahrenheit/48
degrees Celsius. At this temperature, the skin of adults requires an average of five minutes
of exposure for a full thickness burn to occur. When the temperature of a hot liquid is increased to 140 F/60 C it takes only five seconds or less for a serious burn to occur.

Coffee, tea, hot chocolate and other hot beverages are usually served at 160 to 180 F /71-82 C, resulting in almost instantaneous burns that will require surgery. Since immediate removal of the hot liquid from the skin may lessen severity, splash and spill burns may not be as deep as burns suffered in a bathtub."


http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
"Plaintiffs' expert, a scholar in thermodynamics applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn."

http://www.houseandhome.org/tag/thermal-burns
Scalds, the most common thermal burns, are usually caused by contact with hot water. Exposing skin to water at 140°F for three seconds or 156°F for one second will result in a scald. (Coffee is usually about 180°F when freshly brewed.) Immersion burns (such as those that occur in a hot bathtub) involve longer contact and usually burn a wider area. Because grease or hot oil is around 400°F and may not run off of skin as quickly as water does, it tends to cause deeper burns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #177
320. I actually like my coffee cold.
Kill Kill KILL The Heretic!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheilaT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #99
202. 'Did you pour it into a styrofoam cup?
I'm betting you poured it into a ceramic cup, which would cool the water by a lot within seconds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #99
208. The hell you can.
You didn't bother to respond to the graph I posted above, so let's do this: Find a proper thermometer (candy or sterilized meat thermometer will do) and stick it in your coffee cup. Boil the water, pour it into the coffee cup, stir as usual, wait five seconds and read the thermometer.

If it reads anywhere over 160 degrees, not only would I be surprised (since heat will transfer VERY quickly out of the system during pouring and stirring), but you would be risking internal bodily injury by drinking it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #99
406. Wow. Superman. Working in a physics free world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #23
123. Do you get blisters in your mouth and down your esophagus?
If not, then you don't like it as hot as McD's was serving it. Did you read that it was hot enough to melt the styrofoam cups they used?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #23
230. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liquorice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:46 AM
Response to Reply #21
26. It shouldn't be hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns. People spill things by accident all the time,
and McDonald's had a responsibility to make sure their coffee wasn't so burning hot that it would seriously injure someone if it did accidentally spill on someone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:54 AM
Response to Reply #26
27. Why did she put her coffee cup in her lap?
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 02:56 AM by LisaL
Is that a place for a hot coffee?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:58 AM
Response to Reply #27
31. She was holding it between her legs and was trying to put cream and sugar in it.
She was a passenger in a parked car.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:58 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. It was a rhetorical question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #33
73. You should review the definition of 'rhetorical'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:58 AM
Response to Reply #27
32. Did you read the article?
Jesus. This lady suffered 3rd degree burns over 16% of her body. They handed her 187 degree coffee in a cup made of styrofoam- styrofoam, which melts at 187 degrees. The cup basically disintegrated, leaving molten hot coffee all over her groin and legs. If it had burned off a couple of her fingers, would people be able to refrain from blaming her for this, because a hand is an acceptable place for a cup of coffee?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:28 AM
Response to Reply #27
37. Is that a place for a soda? How about a bottle of beer?
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #27
48. The drive-through forgot to provide a table and chair. ("Rhetorical" to you, maybe.)
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 08:29 AM by WinkyDink
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #48
86. If you want a table and chair at McDonalds, I suggest you go
inside instead of using drive-through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #86
91. NO! REALLY?! The point is: drive-thru = cup in car. Not a flat, steady surface.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 11:38 AM by WinkyDink
THUS, the coffee temperature must be such that any spillage is not, you know, DANGEROUS.

BTW: She won, so your arguments have already been found weak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #27
157. she was found 20% at fault for doing so--but do go on, oh ye of infinite knowledge... nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #26
246. do you have the same responsibility
when serving food or hot drinks to guests at your house? do you think you should be open to a lawsuit because instant hot chocolate you serve someone is too hot and they spill it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #246
247. If it is hot enough to scald them like happened to this woman, of course.
Would you just say "oh sorry you ran up a hospital bill and are not partially disabled due to your stupidly spilling that extremely hot liquid in your lap"?

Seriously? You would seriously treat your guests this way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #247
269. so what, pay your one euro for hospital treatment
and dont blame me for spilling the tea i served you. i would not pay shit out to any of my friends, but my friends take REPSONSIBILITY for their actions. othewise i wouldnt hand them joints or lsd either
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #269
273. You are incredible. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #273
290. how so? because i expect my friends to know
that hot food and drinks can burn?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #269
276. Joints and LSD don't result in skin grafts.
Why should your friends be the only ones who are responsible, and not you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #276
291. so if i give my buddy some weed or some acid
and they get busted with it and go to jail that is MY fault??? how???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #291
307. Well, for one, you distributed it.
Two, you're throwing out an invalid analogy again. Now, if you and your buddies toked up at your house and your buddy drove home and killed 3 people in another car by driving under the influence, I'd say you were fuckin' responsible for that, and it would be a little closer to our apple, yet still a different fruit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #307
313. how am i responsible for my friends smoking reefer and then
leaving and killing somone? how ??? really how?? aside from that numerous studies that show even heavy cannabis impairment to be less important that legally allowed levels of alcohol consumption how is it my responsibility that one of my friends i was smoking with does something because they are stoned? i dont force my friends to smoke weed with me. when i go to their houses i smoke and drive home and would never imagine suing them if i got busted as i am responsible for my own actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #313
318. I think you might not want to admit all of that on a public board where the FBI/DEA can see it.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 06:38 PM by darkstar3
Furthermore, it's a simple issue. You invited the friend to your home, you saw he had to drive to get there, you provided the mind-altering substance, and you let him leave in his vehicle (committing a felony) before sobering up.

As I see it, and as a jury just might see it, you're an accessory to a felony, and because you are distributing an illicit substance, a felon yourself. Still, as I said, this a different fruit than the apple in question. I answered your weed analogy because it was in fact your responsibility, but make no mistake about the fact that this analogy really has no bearing on the fact that fast-food coffee caused 3rd degree burns.

On edit: I forgot, you said you're in France, but I'd still keep those kinds of admissions under my hat if I were you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 05:43 AM
Response to Reply #318
387. The DEA is already watching me
Edited on Fri Jan-28-11 05:49 AM by reggie the dog
at my felony possession with intent to deliver trial (45 grams, not even 2 ounces i had in one bag on vacation) i was aquitted after 2 minutes due to illegal search and seizure. A fucking DEA agent came up from DC to rual virginia where my case was and told me that they had been and were still watching me, he gave me his card that i threw on the ground in front of him, i told him he didnt watch too good as i smoked and violated my bond each day i was out. and hello???? i said GIVING,not selling,as in i quit dealing a few years after my trial and i have never sold lsd, just shared with people to trip with. so today if i give a friend weed that means that i roll a joint and pass it to them. also DUI cannabis is not a felony everywhere neither is distributing cannabis. scientifically speaking cannabis never impairs more than legally allowed alcohol levels (the french govt. conculded that high cannabis doses are as dangerous as a .02 alcohol level, far below the illegal threshold, so i have no moral quams about smoking and driving, i do it every day, in Illinois, where i am from, it is illegal to drive for a month after smoking because a failed piss test proves DWI (legally, not scientifically of course) so i just as soon smoke at the wheel and enjoy being high seeing as it has been illegal for me to drive since i started driving. so legally, yes if i smoke a joint with you and you get into a wreck 25 DAYS LATER in illinois i am legally responsible, but i am not morally responsible.

ps the dea was/is watching me and i have never in my life handled more than a half pound of weed at once.... in fact the quarter pounds i often bought in illinois would only be a ticket in ohio.... but the dea is wasting man hours on me.... i take it as something to be proud of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:08 PM
Response to Reply #387
416. DUI, regardless of source, is illegal everywhere.
There is simply no state where you can get away with DUI because you were under the influence of weed. DUI or DWI, it really doesn't matter, you're toast.

And whether you're selling or giving doesn't matter either. Distribution of controlled or illicit substances can be charged whether or not money changes hands. That's why it's a crime for a child to give their Ritalin to someone for whom it was not prescribed.

And now that you've managed to pull this subthread completely off-topic and still failed to make any point whatsoever regarding the McDonald's case, I'm going to terminate this particular line of conversation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #291
327. Distributing illegal drugs is also illegal. You seriously didn't know that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 05:47 AM
Response to Reply #327
388. yes i know that giving somone weed for free is illegal
i just dont care. the fucking plants grow pretty damn easy out in the woods so if i share i share. but if they get busted with a joint i gave them it is not my fault, they got busted, not me, and my friends would never rat me out, they would take responsibility, but you know, and i know, and my friends know that having and smoking weed should not even be illegal.

back to my point, coffee is hot, when i boil up hot chocolate it is hot, i know what hot liquids can do, seeing as i handle hot liquids at home it is reasonable for me to buy equally hot liquids at a restaurant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #246
305. There's a concept in LAw called "duty of care." Corporations are held to a far higher
standard of it than individuals are.

McDonald's was also well aware of the dangers posed by the temperature of their coffee. But do go on, Mr. Medical/Legal Proffessional of Infinite Knowledge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Luminous Animal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:56 AM
Response to Reply #21
28. The temperature of the coffee exceeded guidelines. It was served at a temperature
that would cause 3rd degree burns in 2 seconds. And that is a fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #28
185. Whose "guidelines"? Not the National Coffee Association's.
Brewed coffee should be enjoyed immediately!

Pour it into a warmed mug or coffee cup so that it will maintain its temperature as long as possible. Brewed coffee begins to lose its optimal taste moments after brewing so only brew as much coffee as will be consumed immediately. If it will be a few minutes before it will be served, the temperature should be maintained at 180 - 185 degrees Fahrenheit. It should never be left on an electric burner for longer than 15 minutes because it will begin to develop a burned taste. If the coffee is not to be served immediately after brewing, it should be poured into a warmed, insulated thermos and used within the next 45 minutes.

http://www.ncausa.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=71
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #185
200. "If it will be a few minutes before it will be served"
you like to keep forgetting that part, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:25 AM
Response to Reply #21
36. You'll spew that until it happens to you.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:25 AM
Response to Reply #36
41. It won't happpen to me.
:hi:

Because my car has a cupholder. :hi:

And even if it didn't, I wouldn't attempt to prop a hot beverage in my lap. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeff47 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #41
46. Because your coffee magically teleports to the cupholder
And could never possibly be spilled between the drive-through window and the cupholder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #41
50. There is that little distance between window and console....... But I'm sure you're never clumsy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #41
62. "It'll never happen to me!"


Of course not!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capitalocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #41
111. It won't happen to you.
Because they reduced the temperature.
You've never, ever, ever, ever spilled anything on yourself, ever? OK, Mr. Clean, in the real world, people spill stuff sometimes, and need to at least be aware that the substance they have in their hands can cause third-degree burns faster than you can do anything to remove contact or reduce temperature.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #111
248. and in the real world we are responsible for what we spill
if i spill something it is my fault. coffee falls under the category of shit that is too hot to consume at serving so i am extra careful with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #248
251. And if you gave a hot of 187 degree coffee to a friend, and they spilled it and were burnt?
Would you just laugh and say "oh clumsy you!" while they called 911 for an ambulance?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #251
271. i would not laugh
i do not laugh at this woman either. i would help them any way i could, that is also why i dont put the hot tea near the kids.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #41
184. You do realize you just tempted fate...
Right?

Never say never.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justiceischeap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 06:20 AM
Response to Reply #41
394. It *really* would never happen to me
I don't drink hot coffee...ever. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #21
57. In other words, you are unfamiliar with the case. Got it. nt
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 08:59 AM by blondeatlast
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #21
64. the coffee at mcd's was in the 180-190 degree range, far hotter than safety, and the company had
been warned MANY times (see the list of 700 other scalded victims)

try watching the documentary before you make any more such statements, okay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #21
84. I guess you really AREN'T familiar -
with the full case. :eyes:

The coffer wasn't hot -- it was BOILING -- to save McD's the trouble of cleaning out their coffee equipment ore frequently. Hers was NOT the first incident with the scalding coffee. The pioint is not where she placed her coffe, it is that it was dangerously hot and McD's KNEW IT and yet did nothing to stop the process because it would have cost time=$.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #84
89. Water boils at 187 degrees Fahreneit? I did not know that. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capitalocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #89
113. Close enough.
Pour some boiling water on yourself, and pour some 187-degree water on yourself, and then tell me the difference between the two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harmonicon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #89
261. "water" boils at different temperatures.
212 is for pure water at sea level. If the water has anything else in it, it will boil at a lower temperature. It's the reason why some people will put salt in a pot of water when making pasta or rice. Boiling coffee would be a different - lower - temperature than boiling water. Most boiling water you've ever encountered has likely not been 212 degrees F.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Manifestor_of_Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #84
341. It's called foreseeability.
The fact that the action of her putting the cup between her legs to take the lid off and put sugar in it was absolutely foreseeable. Also, the fact that 700 people had complained of burns and they did NOTHING to change their policy indicated reckless disregard for the public safety and welfare.

NOBODY can drink coffee at 187 degrees without getting burned. That is simple physics.

This case was a no brainer for anyone with a law degree. The combination of the foreseeability, the overly high temperature, and that McDonald's KNEW about 700 people with burns yet failed to change their policy means they are eminently culpable.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
COLGATE4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #21
116. You should attempt to familiarize yourself with some of the facts
before spouting off with your 'informed' opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #21
146. Funny that a jury ruled in her favor - which can only mean that they're stupid too!
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #146
166. Yes, juries can be stupid. Remember OJ? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #166
170. There isn't a juror alive that can top you in the stupidity department.
Enjoy your willful obtusity. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #170
175. Oh no! You called me stupid!
I guess I lost the argument! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #175
179. You sure did lose the argument - much like McDonald's lost the case!!!
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 03:09 PM by devilgrrl
Have a nice day! :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #179
182. Thanks, you too!
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #170
249. so oj was really innocent criminally but guilty in civil court...
one of those juries seems to have fucked up to me...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #249
337. Not ask f'ed up as rooting for McDonald's blazing hot coffee and shitty cups.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #170
252. how many juries
sent innocent black people to jail over the years just because they hated n###ers.


how many juries let whites accused of lynching go free for the same reason....


juries have bias, and can be manipulated by lawyers...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #252
329. I see you're for huge corporations
you must be terribly proud! :hi:

Were you this gitty when goodyear tires split into pieces causing deadly accidents? Must have been the drivers fault huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #329
331. Indeed, they should've known that could happen and taken adequate precautions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #331
339. You can say that again. As if anyone put a gun to their heads.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 07:30 PM by devilgrrl
If they didn't want their tires to explode while they were driving - they should have just stayed home or walked.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #329
365. Everyone has to be either "for" or "against" corporations?
There's a big difference between a corporation negligently selling defective tires which cause accidents and a foolish old lady who thinks it is a good idea to prop a hot beverage in her groin area in a car, instead of simply going into the restaurant and drinking her coffee at a table.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #365
378. You sound "for" a corporation that handed out liquid that gave someone a 3rd degree burn
handed it out to people at the DRIVE THROUGH where they were expected to DRIVE with it, not "simply going into the restaurant and drinking her coffee at a table." Unless you think people should go through the DRIVE THROUGH and then park, walk inside, and drink at a table?

Yeah, that poor corporation that handed out coffee hot enough to cause third degree burns, burns through the whole skin into the fat layer underneath in their drive through window. I mean, really! Who would EVER have expected anyone in a car to have the slightest danger of spilling this burning liquid?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 06:04 AM
Response to Reply #329
390. faulty made tires are the companies fault
if you are constantly running an over or under inflated tire against the secifications for safe operating then you share some blame.

if a drug company sells a drug that causes harm through normal use they should be sued over it

if a food company sells non pasturaized milk labeled as pasturized and you get salmonela you should sue them and win

i just dont see how adults are not to be trusted with less than boiling hot liquids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #390
404. i just dont see how adults are not to be trusted with less than boiling hot liquids.
Why should liquids be served so hot?

What a bizarre world view you have. :crazy:

Very sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #390
410. And if liquid is served at a dangerous temp, a good part of the fault for resulting burns is the
restaurant's fault. Glad you are getting it.

If a drive through sells hotter than to be expected, hotter than advised, liquids, they hold some responsibility for the resulting burns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #410
419. we have differing views of what a dangerous temperature is
in my opinion a hot drink is hot so therefor can possibly burn me if i spill it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #419
421. And again, you can't possibly expect that a hot drink
Edited on Fri Jan-28-11 03:23 PM by darkstar3
meant to be enjoyed by you will cause you THIRD DEGREE burns. At this point I call shitstarter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #419
422. No, we have differing views of what an acceptable temp is. We both agree that
liquid that burns through your skin into your underlying fat and muscle is dangerous. I do not see much doubt of that definition of "dangerous".

Regarding acceptable temperatures: A liquid that simply burns you, that turns your skin red is acceptable to me. One that burns down to the muscle isn't acceptable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-11 06:09 AM
Response to Reply #422
450. you sum it up very well
we disagree over what an acceptable temp is. perhaps it is a cultural thing, i have been living in france for 8 years and over here we may have different expectations
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #252
332. We should do away with trials - if you get murdered - you should have protected yourself.
Women who get raped ask for it....

I see your point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Telly Savalas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #252
361. So you're arguing that an organization with some of the deepest pockets
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 10:27 PM by Telly Savalas
in the world couldn't be bothered to hire a competent enough lawyer to beat what you think is clearly a frivolous lawsuit.

If they're that fucking incompetent, McDonald's deserves to pay the settlement anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #166
171. This jury found the plaintiff 20% at fault. and I'm still waiting for you to
drink that coffee; I think I DO want to watch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #171
176. Let me defer to the National Coffee Association
Brewed coffee should be enjoyed immediately!

Pour it into a warmed mug or coffee cup so that it will maintain its temperature as long as possible. Brewed coffee begins to lose its optimal taste moments after brewing so only brew as much coffee as will be consumed immediately. If it will be a few minutes before it will be served, the temperature should be maintained at 180 - 185 degrees Fahrenheit. It should never be left on an electric burner for longer than 15 minutes because it will begin to develop a burned taste. If the coffee is not to be served immediately after brewing, it should be poured into a warmed, insulated thermos and used within the next 45 minutes.

http://www.ncausa.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=71
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #176
186. funny--even the NCA's expert testified on Ms. Liebeck's behalf, saying that McDonald's served the
at a temperature that exceeded their recommendations.

Link to the case in detail: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2545263/liebeck_v_mcdonalds_restaurants_or.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #186
189. Wow. A hired gun expert witness tailoring their testimony in favor of their client?
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 03:18 PM by Nye Bevan
I never heard of such a thing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #189
191. Yes, from the very association you cited above to assert your ignorance.
Imagine!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #191
192. Game, set, match.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #176
203. "If it will be a few minutes before it will be served,"
Ever read Goebbels?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #203
210. Frank Luntz did--and considering the propaganda surrounding this case,
I don't doubt he had a hand in catapulting said crapaganda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starckers Donating Member (82 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #21
194. Fix 
You can't fix stupid..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #194
311. Good thing we have smart juries then. Can't wait to see more from you...
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pacalo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #21
214. McD's kept their coffeemakers at 187 degrees so that the coffee would have a longer shelf life,
for the sake of time saved, not for customers' sake to have the hottest cup of coffee in town.

This 79-year-old woman had 79-year-old skin that grew much more tender & unable to fend off a 3rd degree burn. As her daughter pointed out in the interview, her mother was never as active as she had been before the injuries. Her quality of life went down as she became less mobile.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #21
216. Coffee is not supposed to be THAT hot
Coffee has another problem: it's got oil in it, which retains heat. Putting 187-degree water (the temperature of the McDonald's coffee in question) on someone will burn them less than putting 187-degree coffee on someone.

Another point: one of the things her lawyering team did was to go to every restaurant in the area--apparently this McDonald's was in a fast-food restaurant row--and measure the temperature of the coffee being served at each. Everyone else's coffee was somewhere around 160 degrees. (IIRC a home drip coffee maker produces 160-degree coffee.) Coffee is supposed to be hot; this McDonald's coffee was so hot it was not safe for use as a beverage for human consumption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starckers Donating Member (82 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #216
288. What is the Temperature of a liquid?? 
Whatever the thermometer says, not what is the temperature of
coffee from rival's stores.  Define too hot?  You can't. 
Define too cold??  Also.  As in this case you can't fix
stupid.  She should sue the car manufacturer or the car owner.
 Everyone is looking for a gravy train.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #288
316. "Too hot" is when it's unsafe to use
180-degree coffee is capable of removing the skin from your mouth before your brain can tell you to spit it out.

Look up the particulars of the case in a non-right-wing publication and you'll see she only wanted her medical bills to be repaid. She didn't sue until after they refused.

Incidentally, I can think of a lot better ways to make money than dumping scalding coffee in my lap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinboy3niner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #288
321. Did you even bother to READ this thread?
No one looking at the facts here could accuse this victim of merely "looking for a gravy train." That is both a clueless and a heartless thing to even suggest.

Yes, there is such a thing as too hot, as many government and private organizations have recognized and defined in their safety standards. See darkstar3's Post # 215, downthread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #288
351. That is such total BS
Were you aware that she initially offered, without a lawyer, to settle the case of McDonalds would just pay her medical expenses (which would have been $15,000-$20,000)? Do you call that a gravy train? They refused and offered her $800. Want to know why? Because under those circumstances, they couldn't keep her quiet. They had non-disclosure agreements with other victims, but she wouldn;t go along with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kas125 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #288
373. I can define too hot - hot enough to do damage like this:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #373
379. kick for graphic photo of what a 3rd degree burn from hot liquid looks like
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kas125 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #379
380. I really tried to avoid having to post a picture, but damn,
the ignorance around here is simply appalling and it NEEDED a graphic photo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:36 AM
Response to Reply #380
383. I just did a long post about what 3rd degree burns and 16% means...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=282734&mesg_id=290152
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kas125 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #383
385. Wow, thanks. I worked at an elementary school for a long
time and we had a kid who looked like that. The story he told me was that when he was a little, his grandma was going to give him a bath and the water was too hot. I didn't and still don't understand how a grandmother could do that, but that's what he told me. Derek had scars all over and only half of his head had hair on it. He's a sweet, wonderful kid and it was heartbreaking to see him like that. I was so pleased that all the other kids accepted him as he was and never teased or made fun of him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #21
440. Jurisprudence would disagree with you.
Edited on Sat Jan-29-11 07:40 PM by WinkyDink
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:45 AM
Response to Original message
25. Yes I remember that and I remember how they put out
one story that it was a little burn and she wanted the money to buy her grandson some fancy car ... SHAMEFUL they did something like that to her. :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #25
67. They were shameless with their propaganda the minute she filed. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #67
72. I'm a paralegal and studied this class in Civil Procedures. My instructor was an attorney
that DEFENDED major construction companies from liability claims--and even she was on Liebeck's side. In the beginning, Those of us who knew the real story were of course on Ms. Liebeck's side.

By the end of the class and the mock trial, everyone in the class--even our die-hard "Rush is Right" RWinger--supported Liebeck. I got a very smug statisfaction out of that.

Anyone who doesn't support Liebeck OBVIOUSLY doesn't know the facts of the case, it's as simple as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #72
75. I hate to admit this but I first laughed at her.
Then I read a few more details about the case and felt so bad for laughing. It thought me a really valuable lesson.

Just out of curiosity, in Kucinich's case, after legal expenses, what would $150,000 against 4 different companies even come to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #75
106. I'd love to read the complaint and answer; I expect that they will be soon available
online. Usually the complaint will spell out who the plaintiff thinks is most liable and it's always kind of fun when different parties have to answer!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #106
369. Let me know if you ever find it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
handmade34 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #72
308. it is that simple!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzteris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #72
441. +1000!
"Anyone who doesn't support Liebeck OBVIOUSLY doesn't know the facts of the case, it's as simple as that."

Absolutely true.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Lane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:21 AM
Response to Original message
35. The linked story glosses over the McDonald's cover-up and media manipulation
As the family members say in the interview, the case was settled after the trial. McDonald's agreed to drop its appeal. In return, McDonald's insisted that Stella Liebeck and her attorney agree not to discuss the case in the media and agree not to disclose the amount of the settlement.

That's part of why the coverage was so one-sided. McDonald's knew that a full exposition of all the facts would be devastating to its position. The corporation went out of its way to silence its victim. Even now, you'll note that the family members won't answer Amy Goodman's question about how much McDonald's paid.

When I talk with people about the case, and all they know is what the corporate media told them, they're usually very interested to hear that McDonald's demanded the victim's silence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Citizen Worker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:28 AM
Response to Original message
38. I was at a conference where her attorney spoke and I recall the attorney telling the audience that
Ms. Liebeck suffered third degree burns to vaginal tissue! Now that is some damned hot coffee and please note that after this lawsuit McDonald's significantly lowered the temperature of their coffee.
Tort reform as proposed by the right will serve two purposes. It will greatly reduce access to the judicial system for working class people because one of the requirements will be for the loser to pay the attorney's fees and costs. It's not difficult to imagine a plaintiff's reaction to hearing that. Most will simply walk away. The other purpose is to limit the political contributions to democrats from trial lawyers. Fewer clients filing suits against scumbag employers or manufacturers of defective products means less money for contributions.

When you hear dirt bags on the right screaming for tort reform what they really mean is that working class people are locked out of the legal system. When they shout about frivolous lawsuits what they don't mention is that there already exists court rules that allow the other side to bring a motion before the court to declare ANY lawsuit frivolous based on the evidence before the court. So, it's not about freeing up a clogged legal system it's about restricting access.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DirkGently Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #38
88. Yep. There are frivolous suits, but they're not the problem they're made out to be.

The rightwing rage comes from the fact that a lawsuit, especially undertaken on a contingency fee basis, gives people with limited resources the ability to complain about a harm caused by an entity or person with huge resources.

And that's not just not the way the world is supposed to work, apparently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnorman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:39 AM
Response to Original message
42. Elsewhere on DU, there was a posting about Dennis Kucinich.
He had bit into an olive pit in a sandwich, and chipped a tooth. The article said that Dennis had filed suit for a LARGE value --- much larger than any reasonable dental bill. There were some chortles from a predictable few, about "Poster Boy for Tort Reform". But it's quite possible that Dennis too had only asked for medical expenses, but they tried to do what McDonald did in this instance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #42
51. You have no idea, really, about the cost of his multiple surgeries.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnorman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #51
53. No I don't , really. So please clue me in.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #53
92. Why should I doubt the plaintiff in this case?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nye Bevan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #42
59. He sued for $150,000 over a chipped tooth.
I guess his dentist is expensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #59
68. That's a lie. He had to have MULTIPLE and EXTENSIVE dental work
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 10:25 AM by Catherina
for EXTENSIVE injuries, some of which are PERMANENT and require FUTURE SURGERY also. And the lawsuit is against FOUR different companies who provide food unfit for human consumption and containing "dangerous substanceS". This is about more than an olive pit.

For all you know the lawsuit could be about DDT in the food. Chipped tooth indeed. EPIC FAIL.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #59
70. You don't have multiple surgeries for a simple chipped tooth - you know that.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 10:38 AM by Hassin Bin Sober
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
47. Yes, and I recall posting about the facts years ago. Some people just like to laugh at others'
misfortune, change the topic to themselves, miss the point, read superficially, spread the "frivolous lawsuit" anti-democracy line, or otherwise side with irresponsible and/or venal corporate America.

People here are even mocking Dennis Kucinich, never MIND that he needed SURGERY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WingDinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #47
83. It BOILS down to money.
They were warned many times in court to turn the temp down. The coffee pots at McD's dont have temp dials, so they would have to outfit all McD's with new pots. They thought that the lawsuits would cost less than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #83
94. Ah, yes, ye olde cost-benefit analysis. Let's see; if we omit this $5 wing-bolt, we can save........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prophet 451 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
49. I knew the full story
That case was brought up so often as a caricature about how tort reform was needed that I hunted down the case notes. A beverage that will give you third-degree burns is far too hot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
54. Yes--studied it, played Ms. Liebeck in a mock trial, know it inside and out and
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 09:05 AM by blondeatlast
while I'm no Kucinich fan and I'm thinking his suit may be silly--I don't claim to know if the case has merit or not.

Ms. Liebeck's most assuredly did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
58. I learned the truth about Liebck v. McD's from an attorney who DEFENDS consturction businesses
in multi-million dollar lawsuits.

Even she insisted that McD's was at fault--once we studied the case with her, not a single one of my class agreed with McD's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greybnk48 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
61. I saw pictures on some show (Dateline?) of how badly
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 09:51 AM by Greybnk48
the people were burned (several, not just Stella Liebeck). Pictures of them in their hospital beds. Their privates were covered by a small drape, and all of the skin was gone from their upper thigh area into their crotch. These were horrid injuries. They all had to have multiple skin grafts and the injuries were clearly horribly painful and disfiguring. It's amazing that these people were discredited so thoroughly. I'm glad to hear the truth will be heard to some extent.

Edited to add: The Dateline show aired sometime in the early 90's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
63. Next up: who can describe the "Twinkie Defense"? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #63
69. and the case of dan white relates to this case HOW, exactly?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #69
71. In that it's a legal precedent that's widely misunderstood (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #71
74. the murders of moscone and milk, and dan white's defense, still have nothing to do with this case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #74
76. Whatever
Just like most people complain about the McDonald's case without understanding what the case was, most people complain about the "Twinkie defense" without knowing what it actually was (or, for that matter, without realizing it was connected to Moscone's and Milk's murder).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #76
96. Perhaps you'd like to start a thread on this NEW topic?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pryderi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:55 AM
Response to Original message
80. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DirkGently Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
85. I remember that case being falsely sold as an example of a bad plaintiff. Worthy of a documentary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #85
98. It's part of the on-going Right-Wing drive to CURTAIL citizens' RIGHT to legal redress.
Make jokey, sarcastic sound-bites for the masses, repeat them, hahaha, throw in terms such as "tort reform" and "clogged courts," add a few lawyer jokes (not that I've never cracked any), and there you have it: regular Joes and Janes all riled up AGAINST their fellows, once again deflecting attention from the Corporate Masters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jonnyblitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #85
187. it was a pet issue with Rush Limbaugh in the 90's as well. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
95. As usual big business controls the story...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BulletproofLandshark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
97. I guess I should have expected a couple of people to stick up for poor, innocent McDonald's.
So-called Democrats disgust me sometimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
101. Can't recommend this enough.
Note that if Stella Liebeck had lived in a European country and had single payer insurance that did not require her to make an outrageous co-payment, she probably would never have sued.

If corporate America wants to avoid these kinds of lawsuits, it needs to back single payer health insurance.

Most plaintiffs in personal injury cases sue because of their medical bills or a real loss in the value of property, not for the other damages.

For some reason, corporations are often more willing to pay huge, huge lawyers' fees than to simply pay for a person's real medical expenses and call it a day. They would be so much smarter to ask for receipts, talk to the doctors to verify that the medical expenses were genuine and necessary and just pay the medical expenses. Corporations cause all the litigation, not greedy people, not even greedy plaintiffs' lawyers.

Greed is its own punishment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #101
145. Punishment? I don't see McD's going bankrupt anytime soon, do you?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #101
209. She requested McD's pay her medical expenses (the ones her OWN ins. didn't cover)
before she even thought about consulting an attorney. McD's, in their infininite wisdom, declined.

Only then did she consult an attorney. Your premise could not be more correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RayOfHope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #209
292. YES! Most people don't realize this. She didn't set out to become a millionaire
she just wanted her medical expenses paid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newtothegame Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
103. The only tort reform I'm in favor of is redirecting punative damages to charity.
Trial lawyers claim punitive damages are designed to send other like businesses a warning to avoid the behavior that got the defendant business in trouble. Fine, I get that.

But if that's the case, why does this money need to go to the plaintiff? The jury already achieved "making them whole" when they assigned specific damages based on the merits of the case, why then do they and their lawyer need millions in punitive damages on top of that?

Just imagine if the millions in punitive damages went to grant wishes for Make-A-Wish? Or to the National Cancer institute to fund research?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
louis-t Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
104. I've used the truth many times in this case.
The people I know who believe the propaganda didn't know the facts. McDonald's jacked up the temp of their coffee because their customers would buy it on the way to work. By the time they got through traffic and parked and got to their desk, the coffee was cold. That is why this woman was burned so severely. From 120 to 180 deg. I believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #104
119. And the difference in temp between McD's and the industry standard aggravated her injuries from
1st and 2nd degree burns to 3rd degree.

That means that the burn went right through all of her skin and to the underlying flesh. )))shudder(((
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CanSocDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #104
142. In the documentary....
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 01:44 PM by CanSocDem

...it mentions that the temp. of the coffee was high to make it last longer in the pot.


.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #104
370. That was their excuse - not backed by the facts

The fact of the matter is that the in-store customers drink it there, and most of the drive through customers drink it while they drive.

They jacked up the temp to cut down on free refills.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
107. When Obama's SOTU speech talked "medical malpractice reform" ... same thing --




Here it is ... third item down --

Public Citizen --

Many of President Obama’s proposals are politically driven efforts to court Big Business, and are downright harmful.

* The president reiterated his support for a NAFTA-style trade deal with Korea. He said the deal would “support” 70,000 jobs, but even the relevant government agency, the International Trade Commission, acknowledges the deal will lead to a net loss of U.S. jobs. We’ve seen the NAFTA movie over and over. Why does the president propose to replay it?

* Although the president insisted he would defend rules to advance important public purposes, he also said that “to reduce barriers to growth and investment, I’ve ordered a review of government regulations.” There is no credible evidence that regulation is a barrier to growth. And, as yesterday’s report from the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission reminds us, a lack of regulation led directly to the financial crisis and the Great Recession.

* Although the president said he did not want to address budgetary concerns “on the backs of our most vulnerable citizens,” he is ready to look at Republican proposals on “medical malpractice reform.” Unfortunately, those proposals are not about reducing the actual incidence of medical malpractice, which continues at epidemic levels, and they’re not about lowering cost. They are about stripping malpractice victims of the right to go to court for compensation. Medical malpractice lawsuit costs are actually falling, and they do not constitute a significant portion of overall healthcare spending. Limits on patients’ access to justice are nothing more than a gift to health insurance companies and healthcare providers, at the expense of injured patients.

By agreeing to the Republican position that we need aggressive short-term measures to reduce the deficit — even as one in six people seeking full-time work are unable to find it, and as the productive powers of the nation remain massively underutilized — President Obama has hamstrung his ability to undertake bold initiatives. Even so, there are large revenue sources available.



:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
109. Ms. Liebeck originally asked McD's to compensate her ONLY for her medical expenses. McD's REFUSED.
McD's had already settled several cases regarding injuries from overly hot coffee. It was proven in court that McD's corporate policy required the coffee to be served at temps much higher than their competitors.

MORE IMPORTANT--the difference in temp between McD's coffee and and the industry standard caused her burns to be more severe--that's the issue the original jury turned on.

Those who have ANY defense for McD's in this case don't know the facts, it is really that simple. And I'll state right here that I I'm an occasional McD's customer--not a fan, by any means, but not a hater, either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #109
236. Didn't know that, either -- ! Thanks --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
112. Thanks kas ... and always the right wing propaganda campaign precedes new inroads ...
on citizens' rights -- and justice --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kas125 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #112
374. You're welcome. It's horrible to see that there are still
people, even here on DU, who still believe that it was her own fault instead of McDonald's greed for a few more pennies that cause the entire incident.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
115. I never eat at McDonald's....
anyone w/ a social conscience should not patronize this disgusting, arrogant, Corporation. Especially when there are so many other places to go.

Hell, the food most of these places serve isn't good for you. Wendy's at least has good salads. Better to just save your money and fix something good at home. Brown-bagging it in today's economy is the way to go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leahcim Donating Member (56 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
117. Comprehensive universal health care...
...would have obviated any "need" for tort reform in this case. Stella Liebeck would not have asked McDonalds' insurance to take care of it (and sued when they did not) if her injuries did not result in the potential for expensive medical bills that were only partially covered.

If it wasn't for the fact that medical bills are so large and unpredictable, damages in cases where products cause personal injury would be so much less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #117
134. +1
Very well said

Welcome to DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #117
138. Quite true--Ms. Liebeck only sued after McD's refused to cover her med expenses.
Most people don't realize that that is all she wanted in the beginning; it was only after McD's wouldn't cough up that amount that she sought legal counsel.

Welcome to DU! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johonny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #117
174. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #117
330. +1000! Welcome to DU! Care to guess what malpractice premums are in France?
$150/year for GPs and $650/year for specialists. That "health care is a human right" stuff eliminates the need for tort reform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
137. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
139. The sad truth
I've "studied" this case several times. It is true that the vast majority of what folks think they "know" is false. But it is also true that the more one looks at it, the more questions remain than are answered.

The biggest questions was whether the coffee was even at the supposed 187 degrees that's always thrown around. An awful lot of that coffee was sold with out these problems. If the temperature was part of the problem, there is a very good chance the coffee was even hotter than 187.

Another equally possible situation was that there was something wrong with the cup itself. They make them by the bajillions and it easily could have been a defective cup as anything.

They sold ALOT of this coffee, so alot of customers were apparently quite happy with it, despite its supposedly undrinkable temperature. This may have vastly more to do with the amount of cream they put in it, or possibly the amount of time they drove before every trying to drink it. But for some reason it was relatively popular.

One does wonder how MacDonalds let it get as far as it did. They had multiple opportunities to get out of this "cheap". They also had enough warning to modify their procedures if they thought there was a problem. For some reason, they didn't think there was a problem, and in fact thought there was a sales advantage to whatever temperature they were actually achieving. Go figure.

One can understand the plantiffs point of view, even if they don't agree with it. The primary problem here was someone handling a hot cup in an "inappropriate" setting. It does beg one to ask why anyone would SELL such a thing as well. I think of this case everytime I order tea on an airline. The "hot" water they give you with which to make it is barely hot enough to make the tea at all. But one doesn't have to think very long about the idea of pouring and distributing boiling water from a cart on an aircraft to see why any "thinking" person wouldn't chose to do it.

But the best comment I've seen in this whole thread is the one about universal health care. The reason that the GOP should have been on board for a "public option", or more importantly universal health care is because the result WOULD be tort reform. Once the government is directly burdened by the costs of the accidents, THEY can take action, directly into the market place. McDonalds probably would have been instructed long ago to stop the practice, because the government was tired of picking up the tab. Furthermore, in a general sense, "malpractice lawsuits" would almost assuredly become a thing of the past because the government would tolerate being the insuror of doctors. They would take it over, and then limit the damages directly, and also GET THE BAD DOCTORS OUT. They wouldn't want to pick up the tab.

In the end, MacDonalds probably got out of this cheap, despite the various numbers thrown around. I'm sorry about Stella, but one of the lessons is to be a bit more careful about handling dangerous things. You don't jump on superman's cape, you don't spit into the wind, you don't pull the mask off of the old Lone Ranger and you don't put the cream in your hot coffee while it is balanced on your lap. It may matter in court who pushed Humpty Dumpty off the wall, but an egg shouldn't be climbing up on them in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #139
152. "alot of customers were apparently quite happy with it"
Alot of customers were apparently quite happy with the Ford Pinto, too. Well, except for folks like these:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #152
154. Yup
It is the problem in the market place that even defects will often affect a very small segment. I'd probably go out on a limb and say that Pinto owners didn't like the car for its fire resistent capabilities. But customers appeared to like the coffee served at that temp (well, some temp, like I say, there are reasons to believe it was even hotter that day than was suggested).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #139
156. I'm sorry, but no.
"You don't jump on superman's cape, you don't spit into the wind, you don't pull the mask off of the old Lone Ranger and you don't put the cream in your hot coffee while it is balanced on your lap"

The consequence of mishandling coffee should not be 3rd degree burns. I've spilled coffee when I wasn't 100% careful. I didn't end up in the hospital. When a restaurant serves a beverage, and their customer ends up in the hospital, that restaurant is liable. Because human beings aren't perfect. They will spill their beverages. That's why you don't serve them scalding hot. If you do, you're going to have to pay the medical bills. And if you fight that, you're going to end up fighting it in court and possibly end up paying millions and ending up with one of the most famous court cases that gets discusses for years. Dumb move, McDonalds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #156
343. Just as dead as right
There was a poem I remember from drivers ed. I think it actually comes from the boating world.

Here lies the body of Johnny O'Day
Who died Preserving His Right of Way.

He was Right, Dead Right, as he sailed along
But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong"

Whether one thinks people should sell coffee that hot, the smart people don't balance hot coffee on their lap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #343
349. And smart businesses don't sell coffee that will cause 3rd degree burns.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 08:36 PM by Pithlet
Smart businesses won't lose millions that way. Because it's just as easy that someone else could have bumped into her, and it wasn't her fault that she spilled the coffee. Because coffee spills. McDonalds knows this. An employee could have spilled the coffee on her, for instance. Smart businesses know that coffee spills. In other words, while it's a fact she did have some culpability (which the jury did factor into the award by the way), the liability still rests with the corporation providing the product. It still should be safe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #349
357. Yup
I am still wondering just what the conversations were that got them that far into such a lawsuit, when they had several opportunities to end it much earlier and cheaper.

That said, I'm still uncomfortable with the approach that says they were some how "more guilty". I can think of no short list of activities and products that I want, enjoy, and roughly need that have significant dangers to them. My tea is served hotter than that coffee (supposedly) was. Of course, I don't buy it at a drive through in a styrofoam cup.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithlet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #357
371. You are perfectly free to serve yourself tea as hot as you want it.
Edited on Fri Jan-28-11 12:09 AM by Pithlet
If you want to make your tea 1000 degrees, if you have such personal private equipment available to make it at that temp, hey have at it. I'm not sure what that has to do with corporations, and what is legal to serve the public. I"m sorry that laws protecting the public make you uncomfortable :shrug: Personally, I'm glad they aren't allowed to scald me, and they'll be found guilty if they do so. Edit to add that yes indeed they were more guilty. Because they knew the coffee was too hot, dangerously so (there were coporate memos stating that fact, not to mention previous law suits settled) and chose to serve it anyway. That does indeed balance the guilt more heavily against them. A customer is entitled to a safe product.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #371
400. Actually, I have no prolbem with "laws"
The discomfort are the "laws after the fact". You have a practice that goes on for years without regulations or laws, and then someone detects a problem, and they don't pass a law, they promulgate a lawsuit. There's not "notice" given that the operator is doing anything wrong. There is no industry standard established with safety guidelines promulgated. "We the People" don't get together and suggest this has to stop. No, the liability lawfirm down the street gets a lawsuit going, mostly looking for a profitable outcome.

I think companies should be held accountable for their actions. When a company tries to hide its involvment or liability for a particular outcome or accident of their product, you have a case where they were knowingly trying to endanger the public without it being known. But when you have a product openly sold, and customers who repeatedly purchase it, then "suddenly" find out it is dangerous, even though the "dangerous" aspect was obvious to anyone that had handled the product before.

I think we should have a much more robust product safety structure in this country. I think all manufacuturers should have to submit their products to a review process. I think at the very least we should be requiring products which exceed certain very large populations to be "approved" for use. But once that "approval" is in place, the manufacturer isn't particularly "liable" for the results, unless they hide them in some sense, or change the product or process that was "approved".

In the Pinto case, they were clearly attempting to hide a known flaw. The way that should have played out was that they should have had to report the problem, and their proposed "solution" for approval. If they got it, they would have been protected. If they didn't, they would have been guilty of murder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheilaT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #139
207. In court McDonald's admitted being sued
some 700 times. But Ms. Liebeck's attorney, who'd already sued them at least once, noticed that a lawsuit he'd had against them wasn't even on their list of 700.

McDonald's was so arrogant about how it was okay to burn customers with too-hot coffee, that the were the ones who brought up the 700 cases while in court. Ms. Liebeck was NOT the only customer who'd ever been badly burned by McDonald's coffee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
147.  Are they sure the cup melted/disintegrated/failed?
If I took any temperature cup and squeezed it with my legs, then removed the lid, there's a chance I could squeeze the cup out of shape, regardless of the temperature.

I just can't find the wherewithal to get angry with McDonald's about hot coffee, versus, say, selling kids on the idea that what they *really* want to eat at any given moment is McSugarFat.

I guess, to sum up my feelings about it - First of all, people in this country need a greater sense of personal responsibility. Secondly,corporations need to stop putting profit over human safety. And third, I really don't know whether this
court case clearly illustrates either of those two.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #147
153. Yes! Personal responsibility! Personal responsibility! Personal responsibility!
Rah! Rah! Rah!
:spank:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #153
255. yes! an infantile, deresponsibilized adult population
rah rah rah....


i am against the war on drugs, i think heroin and crack should be legal, but i think that adults should know that crack and heroin can harm them, so i dont think they should be able to sue the company selling to them. adults should also know that steaming hot drinks can burn, perhaps she should have done what we do in europe, stop at a cafe and drink a cup of coffee at a table..... why do people want to do everything in their damned car?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #255
257. That's not a word, and I'm still waiting to hear back on expectations
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 06:04 PM by darkstar3
both above and below this post from you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #257
275. what is not a word???
you dont have a word for that in english?? déresponsabilisation???? déresponsabilisé??? deresponsiblized???? sorry i will translate for you,,déresponsabilisé means one who does not have a sense of responsibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #147
155. Yeah, I know what you mean
I tend to find more ambiguity than most in this case. It makes an interesting basis for doing values analysis, but it isn't really clear what actually happened that day. I know what the testimony is, but that doesn't necessarily mean that's what actually happened. And I find odd behavior and risk taking on both sides. And one would expect that MacDonalds was smarter than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #155
169. The jury found Ms. Liebeck partially at fault and reduced punitive damages by 20%
for that reason.

Of course, your careful research uncovered that fact so I'm stating the obvious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #169
344. Yeah, I knew that.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #155
232. Let's try a hypothetical.
We've all purchased drinks through the drive through at some point. We've all spilled things on ourselves.

Let's say you purchase coffee on your way to work in the morning, and the person handing it to you through the window didn't quite put the lid on right (which isn't, you know, OUT of the realm of possibility). That person hands you the cup, you take it, and since your grip is just a bit firmer than theirs (due to your desire not to drop the coffee) the improperly fitted lid comes off.

You ever try to hold a fast-food coffee cup without the lid on? It warps, doesn't it? If it's full, it spills.

Now, let's stop here. You've spilled coffee on yourself. It could be your lap, your hand, your chest/stomach, whatever. What do you expect to happen next?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #232
345. It's actually happened to me
I've spilled some very hot things on my skin. Still have the scars to prove it. If I spill hot things on myself, I expect to get burned. I also have to say, a bit like my comment about "hot" tea on airlines, I can't see actually serving hot liquids to people in cars before I'd start to worry about someone ANYONE spilling it.

But like I say, I don't really understand why it never occurred to Macky D's that there was a problem here that needed addressing. And I REALLY don't understand why they fought this so long.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #345
347. My point is that you don't expect 3rd degree burns.
I've burned myself with hot liquids, hot cooking utensils and pots, and even hot water while washing dishes. Those were first degree burns.

I've burned myself on fry-roofs, toasters, grills, and other fast-food cooking equipment. Those were second degree burns.

I've never had a 3rd degree burn, and I'm thinking you haven't either. 3rd degree burns are a rarity, and capable of being lethal, and there is no way in hell we should expect something given to a consumer to be capable of doing that.

We expect to get burned. Getting burned is a necessary evil of living 70+ years. We DON'T expect 3rd degree burns on contact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #347
348. Oh, I have
Fry oil, third degree. The worst was the molten sugar. Still have that scar. That's bad because it sticks to you. When you try to remove it, skin comes up with it. Then there was the time I was working with molten lead (solder). That one REALLY hurt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #232
397. I'd like to know whether the following sentence calls for more responsibility...
Edited on Fri Jan-28-11 07:48 AM by urgk
from the coffee provider or the coffee user --

"You ever try to hold a fast-food coffee cup without the lid on? It warps, doesn't it? If it's full, it spills."

To me, it seems like both, but I'm just curious what you think.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #397
420. Simple progression.
What do we know?

1. Coffee is hot. Whatever temperature you serve it at it's going to cause some kind of burn.
2. Passing a coffee cup from one person to another is going to cause variations in grip pressure.

Therefore, a responsible coffee provider will do one of the following in order to prevent injury to their customers and help generate repeat business.

1. Serve coffee in stronger cups that will not warp.
2. Serve less coffee in each cup so that warping will not cause spillage.
3. Ensure that there is a lid-fitting AND CHECKING procedure that will guarantee a tight fit of the lid and eliminate warping.

Simply put, if I grab something off the counter behind me and hand it to you, and burn us both during the transfer, who's the jackass?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #420
443. Your equivalent...well...isn't.
If you hand me something that I know to be dangerous, and I put it someplace...delicate, we're probably both at fault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #443
447. Your attempt at equivalent responsibility is...not.
The bottom line is that if I hand you something SKIN-REMOVING dangerous when there is absolutely no expectation for it to be so, it doesn't matter whether the something you burn is delicate or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-11 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #447
451. So, you'd take something skin-blistering...
and act with abandon, knowing it wasn't skin-removing?

That doesn't seem prudent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #147
161. If the case had no merit then why did a jury of her peers rule in her favor?
I'll keep asking that question until someone answers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #161
259. the jury is representative of an infantalized population
they think they are not responsible for their actions. instead of realizing that steaming hot liquids can burn them they prefered to think that a company should know better because 700 other people didnt take precautions with steaming hot liquids. this jury was made up of the same kind of people who hear about some kind of story and then think "there should be a law against that". the kind of people who think heroin, crack, cannabis, lsd and the like should be illegal because they are bad for you, that think that adults cannot be allowed to decide for themsleves after making their own risk management assement, the same kind of people who think that if you smoke reefer and go hang out with your friends instead of working or doing homework that it is the reefers fault and not your own fault for being lazy.

i could go on and on
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #259
268. If you could go on and on, how about answering #232, or #215?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #268
277. 232 is done
215?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #277
278. Like hell it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #278
294. i answered it already
what do you want?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #259
381. 3rd degree burns. 16% of her body. Here is what that means (photo and words)
3rd degree burns go through your entire skin, into the fat, into the muscle, into bone. Your skin is gone. Not just injured, but burnt away. Dead, gone, no skin left there. So you have exposed adipose tissue. Or muscle. Tendons. Bone even. However, I do not think it burnt her to the bone. However, again, it did destroy her skin.

Skin is a big organ and what keeps our insides in and safe from the outside world. Safe from trauma (rubbing or poking), safe from bacteria. Once your skin is gone, you can get infections very easily. And liquids seep out. You need skin grafts if it is anything beyond very minor.

It takes quite a time to heal and is a huge trauma to the rest of your body, to most of the other organs. Children and the elderly are more likely to experience complications from burns. As it heals, thick nasty scabs develop, can lead to having limited flexibility, having frozen joints, etc.

Here is a very good explanation of what burns entail. http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BI108/BI108_2007_Groups/group11/burn.html

Here's a picture of someone after getting burned. Notice how odd the skin looks? She had skin grafts, places for her body to integrate bits into itself to form "skin".



Burns are calculated by "rule of 9's", total body area that was burned. Wiki has a list here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_nines
In simple fast calculations of 9%

Anatomic structure Surface area
Anterior head 4.5%
Posterior head 4.5%
Anterior torso 18%
Posterior torso 18%
Each Anterior leg 9%
Each Posterior leg 9%
Each Anterior arm 4.5%
Each Posterior arm 4.5%
Genitalia/perineum 1%

She was burned over 16% of her body, the lower part of her torso, her genitalia/perineum, thighs. That compares to just about her entire torso. Of the whole front and back of a leg. Or both arms.

Now, let's look at a company that sells liquids to take and drink in the car. Might they at any point have any thought that maybe someone might spill something? That perhaps selling liquid that is hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns over a large part of a person might not be a good idea?

Maybe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 06:07 AM
Response to Reply #381
391. tyring to get the emotional part of my brain to take over from the logical
part by showing me a gory photo??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #391
414. No, just giving info on what a 3rd degree burn entails, and that 16% of a body
Having worked (briefly) in a burn unit, I've had experience that you may not have and educating people is a good thing. Guess you feel differently. Maybe you missed all the words I wrote in that post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #161
395. Keep asking...just don't ask me. :)
I tried to make it clear that I find the whole case confusing, not wholly without merit. And I find it interesting that there is so much...conviction, I guess...when it seems like a sort of split responsibility between the customer and the McD's.

I mean, I wouldn't risk any degree of burn in my lap area. And coffee would be the last thing I'd put there. But, IF I made that kind of error in judgment, I'd be incredibly surprised (understatement intended) to get third degree burns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #395
423. Tell me this, what if the lid had come off while she was drinking?
Let's say the cup was in her hand, on the way to her mouth, and the lid came off and spilled coffee down her front because she squeezed the cup too hard. Would you still believe that her 3rd degree burns were in any way her responsibility?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #423
444. If she squeezed the cup too hard?
Yes, she'd bear part of the responsibility. Part of being a consumer is to use the product in a sensible way. Squeezing the cup too hard would be insensible.

Now if, in the process of handing the cup to her, something malfunctioned -- the lid, cup, connection between the two -- I'd be behind her 100%. Don't get me wrong, I feel terrible for her. And I'd be all for universal health care paying for this kind of thing. I'm jut not convinced it's such a clear-cut case of the vendor being wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #444
446. That's ridiculous.
"Squeezing the cup too hard would be insensible."

That is a ridiculous statement. There is no way to know, firstly, what the grip strength and usage of every human being will be, and furthermore, from a purely statistical point of view SOMEONE would have to eventually squeeze the cup too hard for the cup's crappy integrity. The bottom line here is that there is an EASY foreseeability of a spill, from various issues, and there is no excuse for a foreseeable spill to cause 3rd degree burns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-11 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #446
453. What's ridiculous is to ask corporations to guarantee every product...
Against every conceivable error in judgment made on the consumer end of things. What if somebody puts a spork in their eye? What if they use housepaint on a gerbil? What if they try to lick cake from an electric knife without stopping the blade? Should sporks have rounded tips? Should housepaint be rodent safe? Should electric knives come equipped with riot shields between the user and the business end?

Of course I'm taking these to an extreme, but coffee is hot. Hot enough to burn your tongue. People know this. A 70+ woman should know that sometimes, coffee, HOT coffee, is too hot to touch. It's too hot to pour into your lap. So, it's too hot to even put there in the first place. Should it be third-degree burn hot? Nope. But, on the very likely chance that it's first or second degree hot, don't put it in your lap and pry the lid off.

This should be like football. Offsetting penalties. Both parties fell short of doing the smart thing.

Play on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tammywammy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #147
162. Even IF she squeezed the cup
The coffee shouldn't have given her 3rd degree burns over 16% of her body.

I worked in the coffee business for years, I spilled on myself all the time, and never once did I get 3rd degree burns (including the time I spilled half a pot on my thighs while filling a large catering carafe).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #162
164. Exactly--the coffee was hotter than industry standards and the temp caused much more serious burns.
an expert in the trial testified that the coffee was so hot that in the time most people could have sopped up the burn and mitigated the damage, the burn had already gone through her skin and to raw flesh.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #162
396. I agree that the coffee shouldn't be hot enough to give that kind of burn.
BUT, I'm not a fan of the idea of risking any degree of burn down near the genitalia. In my head there's no such thing as "only a first degree burn" in one's lap.

It just seems like such a terrible idea to begin with. Had she been burned doing something more...advisable...I'd have more inclination to agree with her side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tammywammy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #396
401. Which is why the jury said she was 20% responsible n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:11 PM
Response to Original message
160. The jury found Ms. Liebeck partially at fault which should make all the "personal responsibility"
folks happy.

They reduced the punitive (not compensatory) damages by 20% for that reason--yet she still was awarded millions...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #160
172. The naysayers don't care.... Until something happens to them.
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
183. And also that Mickey D's settle dozens of other cases out of court...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XanaDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
193. Reason number one zillion and one to avoid McDonald's
they are truly evil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
handmade34 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #193
314. +1
though... I will go into McD's to use bathroom when I must :blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XanaDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #314
322. Me too on the road
it's the LEAST they can do, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catrose Donating Member (591 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
197. What my lawyer friend told me
Is that McDonald's had done this before...a lot...the temperature they were using was in violation of the law...and the court wanted to make sure that McD's remembered this time and never ended up in court again over this issue again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puregonzo1188 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
212. Yes, I was.
Most people aren't. Tort reform is a very scary load of corporate propaganda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
215. Allow me to repost this here, as so many seem to be missing it in the subthread.
Note 1: McD's coffee was 187 degrees Fahrenheit.
Note 2: The CPSC recommends that water heaters have the MAXIMUM temperature set to 150 degrees Fahrenheit in order to prevent injury in showers and kitchen sinks.
Note 3: There is a difference between pouring hot water on your bare skin (higher rate of dispersal and transfer) and pouring it on your clothes which are touching your skin (holding more water and slowing heat transfer).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #215
217. Thank you for this graph, it is easily apparent how 187 degree liquid burns almost instantly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #217
221. Which, I think, is why it was ignored in the subthread.
You don't sip 187 degree liquid. You carefully sip 160 degree liquid, by which action you actually cool it on its way into your mouth through fluid mixture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #215
229. This was the damning evidence, too--the increased temp made the burn get worse
much faster. If it had been even a few degrees cooler, she could have had time to sop up the coffee before IT SCALDED HER EPIDERMIS OFF (caps completely intentional).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElboRuum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
218. Of course not. That would mean we have a media that tells the whole story.
And we all know what state THAT particular institution is in, do we not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NutmegYankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
254. It was taught to me in Engineering Ethics in College.
The case was correct because McDonald's was serving their coffee roughly 30 degrees hotter than the industry standard. It was so hot that it caused 3rd degree burns on contact. A normal person expects discomfort and possibly 1st degree burns from spilled coffee, but not 3rd degree burns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #254
256. and the hotter the water the less coffee can be used!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NutmegYankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #256
258. I don't follow. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #258
289. really hot water +less coffee will
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 06:20 PM by madrchsod
taste the same as more coffee at a lower water temp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #289
293. Oh, you mean it steeps flavor from the grounds better?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #293
403. yes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lunatica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
270. I remember this story. I knew about the scalding coffee
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 06:10 PM by lunatica
Why McDonald's needed to heat the water to such a high degree is beyond me. Maybe they wanted to make sure to kill all germs to protect themselves from lawsuits. I wonder if they still do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:18 PM
Response to Original message
282. I've read this argument here before. I've even seem the same posters act like asses in the same way
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
326. Thank you for posting this... I watched the video of democracy now yesterday.... great coverage.
We are so swindled in this country.... thank the goddess for Amy Goodman!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kas125 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #326
376. You're welcome. It's been pretty interesting reading the
replies in this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
333. To those who are against this ruling - you're date with Karma can't come soon enough.
Now... back to blaming victim.

:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smokey nj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #333
334. +1
I can't believe some of the responses in this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kas125 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #334
377. Yep, it's been an eye opener, that 's for sure! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinboy3niner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #333
338. +2
You have a way with words, devilgrrl! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #333
342. So true, so true. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
346. Stella Liebeck- I got bit in the ass on that years ago on DU
yes I know the whole story and it is more an example of news creation than it is of the original facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mentalsolstice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
350. I've read the comments here and I call bullshit.
Edited on Thu Jan-27-11 08:59 PM by mentalsolstice
I'm legally trained so I know theory as to these cases. To the perfectly coordinated person that says s/he has a cup holder in their car, so this would not have happened, BULLSHIT! In 1992, I was 2 years out of law school and trying to keep my head above water, believe it or not, not all lawyers are automatically rich, and many of us stay very middle-middle class. My late 80s model car did not have cup holders. Yeah there were the kind you could hook into the window rim, but you had to remove them if you wanted to roll down the window...and I certainly did not have a cupholder for the passenger side.

Then factor in a 79 y.o. woman trying to add sugar and creme to the coffee. She put the cup the most stable place she knew. I've dealt with hot coffee in styrofoam cups that are softer when the beverage is hot, in a non-moving car, and in pulling off a tight lid. I've got a little on my hands. Now this where a little known legal theory comes in, you take your victim as you find him or her. In my situation, I have mild cerebral palsy, however as a result, I've got the cup in a cupholder, the top is on really tight, and I'm a little clumsy getting that lid off and that 187 degrees coffee spills out, and I've got 3rd degree burns on my hands. Guess what, you as the negligent party has to pay up.

edited to add a "t" and "car"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #350
398. "She put the cup the most stable place she knew"
Trade the word "cup" in that sentence for anything else potentially (but not necessarily) dangerous, and it seems like she helped bring about the situation by making a bad choice. "She put that safety razor...", "She put that ferret...", "She put that X-acto..."

We've all burned out lips, tongue, palate on hot drinks. We know there's at least that possibility. So, she put something that we call know *can* burn in a place where you don't want burns. Not even the first degree kind. This is the point, I think,
of the personal responsibility crowd.

It's what makes me agree with the idea of split responsibility. She shouldn't have put hot coffee in her lap. But, IF she did, it shouldn't have burned the bejiminy out of her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #398
402. The jury found her partly responsible and reduced the award by 20%.
You might read the thread before you put your infinite knowledge out there for all to see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #402
436. I don't find your tone helpful.
Please, if you'd like to have a conversation, talk across to me, not down at me.

Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mentalsolstice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #398
442. Okay, in a car with no cupholders
Where should she have put the cup? The dash? That's usually guaranteeing a spill, unless the windshield is straight up. The console, lacking a flat place to place a drink? Or the seat? It has a flat surface and you're able to not raise your arms or the drink to put the cream and sugar in (raised drink can tip). Then there is the fact that Styrofoam softens with heat. Just hold the cup a little too tightly in certain places, and the lid no longer fits, thus sloshing liquid out.

All one has to do is look at her injuries to know that coffee was way too hot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #442
445. Yes, the coffee was too hot.
But where it spilled and how she was affected by the situation seem to have been determined by her decision to hold it in her lap. I just don't think that was a very wise choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mentalsolstice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-11 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #445
448. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE SHE WAS BURNED
Edited on Sun Jan-30-11 01:23 AM by mentalsolstice
It's the fact she was burned. Would it make a difference to you if she had been burned on her mouth, chin, chest and/or abdomen? People spill drinks all the time. Legally, it's reasonable to expect such. I've had a third degree burn. I was lucky that the area was the diameter of a golf ball on my forearm, and that I had medical professional (coworker) who could tend to it daily for a couple of months. When it first happened, I could see the layers burned away, skin was gone and I could see fat and muscle, and those areas were blistered.

edited to clarify
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-11 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #448
452. It matters HOW she was burned.
The burn was made much worse by the location - both in terms of anatomy and topography. Had she spilled it on her hand, say, in the process of reaching to get the cup, coffee wouldn't have pooled and continued to burn her.

It was at the very least a mistake to take something a person knows to be at least mildly dangerous and put it in her lap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skepticscott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
352. Interesting that no one has mentioned
some of the most telling facts about this case. Liebeck intially asked McDonalds to just pay her medical expenses (which would have amounted to $15,000-$20,000), and that was before she even hired a lawyer. They offered $800. When she finally did hire a lawyer, he offered to settle for $300,000, which was also refused, as was a pre-trial settlement of $225,000, suggested by a court-appointed mediator. The hitch in all of those for McD's was that they couldn't have bought the plaintiff's silence under any of those settlements.

This case was about the furthest thing from a poster child for tort reform.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mentalsolstice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
353. And then there are the pictures
Google Images is your friend. I can't imagine any publicly served cup of coffee, tea or any other hot drink doing this amount of damage. What you do in your own home, groovy, if you're into burning your lips, tongue and esophagus, and your friends also don't mind. However, I'd advise you to not sell it to the innocent public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
renegade000 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #353
372. That's probably the most convincing piece of evidence
you can show someone to get them to reconsider the case.

I mean, it's not like we're taught in schools the finer points of safety with hot liquids (as in what temperatures for what contact times cause what level burns, etc) and supplied the exact temperature of the hot beverage we're given. Of course it's common sense that spilling a hot beverage on yourself is bad, but it's not really common sense that you could be handed a beverage that can give you third degree burns over large portions of your body.

Perhaps it should be, but given that most people at this point don't know this, you can only fault Liebeck partially (as the jury did).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
362. YES! Thank you. Great OP.
Just a horrible story. That poor woman.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ingac70 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-27-11 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
363. I worked at McD's when that happened.
Their coffee was kept @ 2 degrees below boiling point back then. They lowered the temps after this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #363
382. They also now ask and add the cream before handing it through the window.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 06:15 AM
Response to Original message
393. single payer or NHS would have eliminated this story
the woman wanted mcdonalds TO PAY HER MEDICAL BILLS here in France that would have meant paying one euro per doctor visit.... in the UK you go to hospital and are treated.....no money changes hand
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
399. I find the anger at McD's for hot coffee odd...considering what they do to arteries.
And livers. And kidneys. And our annual health care costs.

There was another thread about the S.F. ban on Happy Meals and the majority of responses were outraged that any governing body would curb the right of parents to feed their kids drive-thru meals with toys in them.

Sometimes I just can't reconcile one total set of responses to an OP with another.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #399
424. If you can't understand the difference between those two,
then you have an odd sense of relativism.

Fast food is crap, and we all know it, and we all know it will make our kids fat and unhealthy if they consume too much of it. But it poses no immediate risks. Fast food isn't going to remove your skin for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
urgk Donating Member (982 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #424
435. On the one level, you're entirely right...
Skin burning off does not equal unhealthy diet.

But, the sum total of consequences from the otehr crap they serve does much more harm than the coffee did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
405. The arrogance and willfull ignorance demonstrated by some on this thread is rather astonishing--
and rather telling as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #405
409. Makes me wonder if they really believe what they say, or if they're just
being contrarian in order to get their kicks, or something. Cause honestly, it's hard to imagine anyone being that stubborn in the face of such overwhelming evidence against their opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #409
412. You are not the only one wondering that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
407. The responses here supporting McDonalds
show that just because you come on a Democrat forum doesn't mean that you aren't completely gullible to media propaganda. Some may vote Democratic, but think like sheep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
devilgrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #407
411. Some claim to be Democrats but they are really wolves in sheep's clothing.
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
darkstar3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #411
425. While I understand the source and brevity of your metaphor,
I must say I disagree with characterizing the non-trolls here as "sheep". :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-28-11 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #407
430. they are probably among those who think customers shouldn't dare ask that
Sears, or their dentist's office, switch from Faux on the TV sets their customers must watch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #407
438. Also doesn't mean one lives in a fact-based world. ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzteris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
437. I had to do a Business Ethics case study on it
McDonald's should rot in hell.

They made a CONSCIOUS DECISION BASED ON PROFIT to continue to scald people unnecessarily!

CORPORATE GREED plain and simple!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
backscatter712 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-30-11 01:30 AM
Response to Original message
449. Stella Liebeck and Dennis Kucinich do indeed have something in common...
They both were accused of filing frivolous lawsuits, Stella over McDonalds' insanely hot coffee that caused third-degree burns to her private parts, and Dennis Kucinich over the pit of an olive.

And both Dennis Kucinich and Stella Liebeck had legitimate grievances and deserved compensation - McDonalds served their coffee at a temperature far hotter than necessary - insanely boiling hot compared to how coffee is normally served, and that olive pit caused Dennis Kucinich to lose several teeth, get a nasty infection, and cost him a huge amount of money in medical treatment and dental work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 03:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC