Originally posted by KharmaDogEven if that coffee was heated to the point that it was hotter than Molten Lava, common sense dictates that a fresh cup of coffee is VERY VERY HOT. The degree of it's temperature is a moot point. That person sued because a lawyer saw dollar signs. In the end every pays for these frivolous lawsuits and people's lack of common sense.
NO. This was NOT a frivilous lawsuit, and the perception that it was is an inaccurate one. There are plenty of frivulous lawsuits around, but this was not one. The amount of ways in which Macdonalds callously contributed towards a lack of safety with a high-risk product were many and they were comprehensively defeated in court due to that problem.
She sued because there is no way in hell any outlet should serve customers material that can give them third degree burns- as their superheated coffee could. It was actively illegal. Since the suit they have stopped heating it to such ridiculous temperatures. People know coffee is hot- NO-ONE thinks it is going to be THAT hot (a clear 45 degrees hotter than coffee normally done at home or at most other outlets), and MacDonalds had made no provision for the problem.
Seriously, MacDonalds were TOTALLY in the wrong on this one, and had carried on with this practice despite clear evidence presented in the trial that they KNEW it was wrong, and their only excuse was that statistically they did not think many people were going to get burned that way- hardly a defence. Their own quality assurance manager in the trial testified under oath that MacDonalds knew the practice was a burns hazard, and that quite deliberatly the policy was that "while burns would occur, McDonald's had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee." Which is to say they deliberately continued with the practice despite having found out for themselves that it was unsafe- and the jury verdict aside, the whole experience led to the judge going out of his way to comment that McDonald's conduct had been "reckless, callous and willful."
And on top of that, her compensatory damages were reduced by 20% in acknowledgement of the fact that the spillage was her fault. But that was not the central point- McDonalds should not have been supplying such a criminally dangerous product in the first place.
That lawsuit was totally deserved, and anyone who thinks otherwise has simply been taken in by a lazy culture of criticising everything in law.
And incidentally, the containers are labelled because other people might not know what is in it if they pick it up. They is amazingly sensible safety legislation- anything that can be dangerous, should be labelled as such. People are too quick to criticise.
-
"Actually if you read most of this thread you will see that more than one person has made the point that passengers not wearing seatbelts can become human projectiles and kill the person(s) sitting in front of them. So that personal freedom argument does not remain valid."
Then she can add that to her argument, but it still did not stand alone.
McDonald's was following NCAUSA guidlines. SHe had more of a case against them then Micky D's, but Mickie D's has more money.
"Coffee is supposed to be served in the range of 185 degrees! The National Coffee Association recommends coffee be brewed at "between 195-205 degrees Fahrenheit for optimal extraction" and drunk "immediately". If not drunk immediately, it should be "maintained at 180-185 degrees Fahrenheit". (Source: NCAUSA.)
The plaintiffs documented 700 cases of burns from McDonald's coffee over 10 years. That works out to one injury per every 24 million cups of coffee sold at McDonald's in the US. So for every burn victim 23, 999 999 people drank their coffee safely. McDonald's did not exhibit "willful, wanton, reckless or malicious conduct.
Originally posted by KharmaDognot to mention I dont see those people getting reparations for their burns as the fool who took it to court did...because they realised it was their fault for spilling it on themselves
McDonald's was following NCAUSA guidlines. SHe had more of a case against them then Micky D's, but Mickie D's has more money."Coffee is supposed to be served in the range of 185 degrees! The National Coffee Association recommends coffee be brewed at "between 195-205 degrees Fahrenheit for optimal extraction" and drunk "immediately". If not drunk immediately, it should be "maintained at 180-185 degrees Fahrenheit". (Source: NCAUSA.)
The plaintiffs documented 700 cases of burns from McDonald's coffee over 10 years. That works out to one injury per every 24 million cups of coffee sold at McDonald's in the US. So for every burn victim 23, 999 999 people drank their coffee safely. McDonald's did not exhibit "willful, wanton, reckless or malicious conduct.