Hot Coffee decades later

[forgop]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/28/booming/storm-still-brews-over-scalding-coffee.html?_r=1&

I don't care what the facts are after the fact. The bottom line is that people wanted a product at the higher temp because it was higher quality. If you're stoopid enough to place hot liquids between your legs, too sad for you.

Mentioned in the video was the fact that the car wasn't designed to place a cup because there wasn't enough surface area or something to that effect. Surprised they didn't sue the car manufacturer either.

As far as the family saying they are still living with the scarlet letter so to speak of the whole thing, don't do stupid stuff and don't file a lawsuit when you do it.

 

[IndyGunworks]

and a scarlet letter so to speak they deserve.

 

[jedi]

I though OP was talking about this....
Hot Coffee mod - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Tyler-The-Piker]

saw the documentary. the pic of the old lady's inner thighs, after the McD's coffee burnt her, is horrific.
she was severely burned. not placing blame anywhere...just recalling how disturbing her injury was.

 

[IndyGunworks]

I can show you some pretty gruesome photos of what a chainsaw did to a man, but he didn't sue the chainsaw manufacturer because they didn't tell him chainsaws were dangerous

 

[shibumiseeker]

Read it in the media when it happened, had a law professor in a business law class I took explain the entire case, and I still think stupid is as stupid does. Hot beverages are hot. Don't spill them on yourself. If you can't take the risk of spilling it on yourself, don't order one. If you do spill it on yourself accept responsibility for the consequences. It's part of why people aren't even allowed to take risks anymore because everyone is afraid of judgements like that.

Now, if an employee had spilled it on her then I would be in total agreement with the damages award.

 

[jkaetz]

I though OP was talking about this....
Hot Coffee mod - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Me too, what does that say about us?

 

[TJ Kackowski]

saw the documentary. the pic of the old lady's inner thighs, after the McD's coffee burnt her, is horrific.
she was severely burned. not placing blame anywhere...just recalling how disturbing her injury was.

Burnt or not, pics of the old lady's inner thigh would be horrific ... just sayin'.

 

[jedi]

Me too, what does that say about us?

That we are old enough to remember what a good game that was!

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Maybe next they can do an expose on declining white Bronco sales after the OJ chase. You know, while they are reporting on stuff no one has cared about for a decade or so.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

If you read more in-depth about the hot coffee lawsuit, you'll quickly learn that it was wholly justified. This is NOT just some kind of frivolous suit - as it is often passed off to be.

Serious Burn Injury ? The Myth of the McDonald?s Hot Coffee Case | Brooks Law Group

There were over SEVEN HUNDRED OTHER coffee burn cases that McDonalds was aware of.

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

She had THIRD DEGREE BURNS on 16% of her body. In all honesty, it's a miracle that she survived the healing process. Also - it was third degree burns in her crotch. THIRD DEGREE BURNS. From "a little bit of hot coffee".

Read more about the case. I'm glad I did.

There are plenty of frivolous lawsuits in this country, but this is NOT one of them.

(Also, while you're at it, read about just how much compensation she ended up with. Note - not much of the original award came to her)

-J-

 

[IndyGunworks]

I don't care if she was awarded 1 dollar or 1 trillion. She bought coffee and spilled it on herself. Can I sue a hot water heater manufacturer if I get burned by the hot water it creates because I didn't expect it to get "that" hot?

The lawsuit is simple. She passed the responsibility of her error onto someone else (the new American way)

If an employee had spilled it on her and burned her, that's a totally different story, but SHE spilled it on HERSELF.

If I trip on a sidewalk bump my head and end up in the ICU do I get to sue the city because I expected the sidewalk to be level?

 

[forgop]

If you read more in-depth about the hot coffee lawsuit, you'll quickly learn that it was wholly justified. This is NOT just some kind of frivolous suit - as it is often passed off to be.

Serious Burn Injury ? The Myth of the McDonald?s Hot Coffee Case | Brooks Law Group

There were over SEVEN HUNDRED OTHER coffee burn cases that McDonalds was aware of.

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

She had THIRD DEGREE BURNS on 16% of her body. In all honesty, it's a miracle that she survived the healing process. Also - it was third degree burns in her crotch. THIRD DEGREE BURNS. From "a little bit of hot coffee".

Read more about the case. I'm glad I did.

There are plenty of frivolous lawsuits in this country, but this is NOT one of them.

(Also, while you're at it, read about just how much compensation she ended up with. Note - not much of the original award came to her)

-J-

Bullets are dangerous too, so when they yield unintended results, do we just sue the manufacturer or dealer that sold them?

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

I don't care if she was awarded 1 dollar or 1 trillion. She bought coffee and spilled it on herself. Can I sue a hot water heater manufacturer if I get burned by the hot water it creates because I didn't expect it to get "that" hot?

The lawsuit is simple. She passed the responsibility of her error onto someone else (the new American way)

If an employee had spilled it on her and burned her, that's a totally different story, but SHE spilled it on HERSELF.

If I trip on a sidewalk bump my head and end up in the ICU do I get to sue the city because I expected the sidewalk to be level?

Bullets are dangerous too, so when they yield unintended results, do we just sue the manufacturer or dealer that sold them?

Either of you research the details of this case? At all? Or continue to believe that it's frivolity?

If there were ever a case of negligence on the part of a company - this is it. Seriously. Read up.

Also - do you honestly think that a company selling a beverage (yes, even a beverage supposed to be hot) that's hot enough to cause THIRD DEGREE BURNS, even if in an unintentional spill, isn't the LEAST bit negligent? Seriously?

Heaven forbid anyone you're related to has to go through something like this.

 

[Bennettjh]

I understand she was burned badly and all that. My question is, why would you take the lid off and put HOT coffee between your legs?

 

[lizerdking]

Either of you research the details of this case? At all? Or continue to believe that it's frivolity?

If there were ever a case of negligence on the part of a company - this is it. Seriously. Read up.

Also - do you honestly think that a company selling a beverage (yes, even a beverage supposed to be hot) that's hot enough to cause THIRD DEGREE BURNS, even if in an unintentional spill, isn't the LEAST bit negligent? Seriously?

Heaven forbid anyone you're related to has to go through something like this.

^^^^ I'm with ya


I've read up on this before.

Mc'D's was aware there were dangers, yet it was cheaper to brew coffee at a higher temp, it used less grounds, it tasted better, and gave higher profits. They were serving it much hotter than a standard cup of coffee.

A reasonable person who drank coffee regularly wouldn't expect 3rd degree burns from a little spilt beverage.

She was burned because someone somewhere decided putting customers at risk was worth a little extra money in their pocket.

And on appeal her compensation was lowered to basically the cost of her medical bills, the initial award in the millions was never paid.


But, just like every news story, people only pay attention at the beginning, too much effort to follow in the long run.



http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

 

[IndyGunworks]

but still the CAUSE of her getting burnt was HER spilling the coffee. She and she alone bears the responsibility as to why the hot liquid even had the chance to burn in the first place regardless of how much hotter it was than a "normal" cup of hot coffee.

 

[jkaetz]

There is a fundamental disagreement here. The justified lawsuit people believe that the suit was proper because said coffee was dangerously hot. While true, the other side of the story is that many things in life are dangerous but do not make the company who produced said dangerous item liable if the consumer has an accident with it.

I find myself leaning to the "It's a dangerous world, suck it up." side of things.

Hot liquids are a funny thing. Liquids are very good at holding heat energy and therefore even a temperature that doesn't sound that hot can burn badly in a short time.

Time to scalding/3rd degree burn

@120°F 5 minutes
@124°F 3 minutes
@127°F 1 minute
@133ºF 15 seconds
@140ºF 5 seconds
@149ºF 2 seconds
@156ºF 1 second

From the case,

Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin as she sat in the puddle of hot liquid for over 90 seconds

So the liquid temp would have been roughly 124. Go heat some hot chocolate/tea/cider/water in the microwave to the point where it is comfortably hot for you to drink. You'll typically be around the 120º mark. The difference is that you aren't going to be sitting in a puddle of it. You'll be sipping small portions.

 

[IndyGunworks]

There is a fundamental disagreement here. The justified lawsuit people believe that the suit was proper because said coffee was dangerously hot. While true, the other side of the story is that many things in life are dangerous but do not make the company who produced said dangerous item liable if the consumer has an accident with it.

I find myself leaning to the "It's a dangerous world, suck it up." side of things.

Hot liquids are a funny thing. Liquids are very good at holding heat energy and therefore even a temperature that doesn't sound that hot can burn badly in a short time.

Time to scalding/3rd degree burn

@120°F 5 minutes
@124°F 3 minutes
@127°F 1 minute
@133ºF 15 seconds
@140ºF 5 seconds
@149ºF 2 seconds
@156ºF 1 second

From the case, So the liquid temp would have been roughly 124. Go heat some hot chocolate/tea/cider/water in the microwave to the point where it is comfortably hot for you to drink. You'll typically be around the 120º mark. The difference is that you aren't going to be sitting in a puddle of it. You'll be sipping small portions.

the difference is if I spill it on myself and get burnt I will not be suing the microwave manufacturer for not letting me know that liquids can become hot enough to burn.

 

[4sarge]

Coffee is BEST Served HOT, Accidents Happen, Idiots abound and refuse responsibility and Ambulance Chasing Attorneys are in Business