"It's Easier to Bury a Tradition Than a Child"

[rox]

Dan,
Thanks for the facts. The manager who put in the program of super heating the coffee no doubt got a good bonus. I worked for GE for 10 years I know how biig corporations work. You explination seems very plausible to me. If I was on the jury I would have voted for the Plaintiff.

 

[patrick_g]

It was not a black and white all or nothing issue. The coffee may have been really hot, maybe hotter than it needed to be B_U_T putting the cheap flimsy container in her crotch was certainly STUPID and certainly contributory to the injury.

Was this the first fast food coffee the idiot ever bought? Did she think the little styrofoam cup was sturdy as a stainless steel coffee mug? Was she in the habit of spilling coffee in her crotch and it was OK so long as the temp did not exceed the average serving temp?

The temperature of the coffee would not be an issue if the person didn't perform an improvident act that would have been patently improvident even if the coffee were served at the average temp of a cup of restaurant coffee.

I fail to see the direct correspondence between the degree of culpability of both parties and the verdict. It was yet another example of a jury giving an excessive award because the depth of the pockets of McDonalds could handle it.

I'm not saying the lady should have received nothing. I'm saying due to her direct complicity (contributory negligence) from such an ill advised and improvident act her award should have been significantly reduced, possibly to medical expenses estimated by competent authority to be in excess of the medical expenses that would have accrued had the coffee been served at the average temp of commercially supplied coffee. Likewise, any pain and suffering emotional trauma stuff could be prorated at the ratio of the above.

Sorry, my apologies to both sides of the debate but she was NOT entitled to such an egregious award nor would it have been fair to not compensate her for some portion of the aftermath of her incredibly ill advised action. There is culpability on both sides.

Pat

 

[Egon]

We don't really know what the reward was.

Fast food implies just that. Quickly obtained and quickly eaten. If one must wait for a cooling period before consumption the fast has left the equation and the food word is also in doubt.

It should also be noted there were many complaints of the hot coffee. It could be alleged that the coffee served was well above the temperature of the norm.

 

[Defective]

Phooey!

Stupid SHOULD hurt.

They gotta learn somehow.

 

[groundcover]

The Gov't could impose a three day 'cooling off period' that should take care of it !

The only unlimited natural resource is human stupidity !

 

[Soundguy]

The lady had third degree burns to her inner thighs, fanny, and genital areas. She was in the hospital for EIGHT days. Which is what happened to the lady. Yes, putting the coffee between her legs not a great idea but if the coffee had not been near boiling hot the worse that would have happened to her was a mess.

You excuse too much.

Heat, in appropriate areas is fine.

Boiling coffee held between your legs seems to be a red flag to me... steamy hot coffee in a cup holder safely away from my skin is fine.

When we ride our tractors we are a few feet away from boiling coolant and blistering exhaust gasses.. but we are ok because they are in their correct spot.. and we are in ours...

Here's this for an anology... would you be surprised if the woman got burned if she had her car's radiator setting in her lap.. Ridiculess right? so is carring her coffee down there!

she made a bad move, hurt herself, then sued somebody else.... people are loosing the sense of personal responsibility...

soundguy

 

[rox]

I wonder if she was driving stick shift. Even though she did put the coffee in a dangerous spot she would not have suffered 3rd degree burns if she would have boughten Burger King coffee. As a jury member I can visualise myself burning my tongue on the super hot coffe. It is the utter disregard for the public in their quest for more profit whihc makes me want to punish them.

I think the extra hot coffee contributed to her spilling is all voer herself. if it was regular hot you could have reachs down and picked up the cup and not spilled the whole darned cup but maybe spill jsut a littl bit. But with practically boiling water on your crotch I am sure she involuntarily thrusted up in her seat therby spilling the whole cup. If I had to put it down to percentages I would say 1% her fault 99% MD's fault. Plus it ticks me off that they did this to discourage people from getting a free refill which they advertise and attracts people to MD's. It is thier blatentness I would punish them for the words "willful disregard" come to mind. They did not care that the customers were getting burned, they were saving money.

 

[Soundguy]

What?...There's no science there.. hot liquid spills just as fast as cooler liquid... still that's the kind of argument a bloodsucke..... er.. lawyer would probably use...

the only science in the case is that if she would have had the cup in a proper holder, she probably wouldn't have had a burned leg...

Blaming others for ones own actions is the act of ultimate arrogance..

soundguy

 

[Egon]

Blaming others for ones own actions is the act of ultimate arrogance..

And for doing this McDonald's did pay.

Stupid SHOULD hurt.

In this case it did. It hurt MacDonald's in the pocket book!

Rox, the Lady was 79 years old and was not driving. She was a passenger.

 

[N80]

Edited: I'm deleting my whole response. For any who may have read it, I apologize for the tone of it but stand by the general theme of it, it just had no place here on TBN. Apologies specifically to Rox. I couldn't disagree with you more and I'd love to have a civil debate on the subject, just not here.