I am SOOOO Mad!

Originally posted by Conniekat8 But, but, then who's gonna protect me from myself? I don't want that responsibility! ;) :p I don't think anyone here wants that responsibility either!;)

Originally posted by botterud Many customers received severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs and buttocks. Sounds vaguely perverse, actually. Solution 1: Buy/use cup holder in car. Solution 2: Don't drink hot coffee in a moving vehicle. Drive safely. Solution 3: Ignore solutions 1 & 2 and let Darwinism solve the problem. It takes a few generations, but it will work. -LBJ

Amen Leonard....

To Aquageek: You write: "You'd almost have to agree that your livelihood depends solely on the existence of insurance, huh?" No I would not. I am not a personal injury lawyer. My practice is civil rights and employment law. My decisions regarding tactics are never based on the presence, or lack thereof, of insurance. I can tell you, however, that cases where there is no insurance tend to resolve much more quickly and efficiently than those where there is an insurance policy. I could explain why, but it would be a treatise. If you want to continue this discussion off-forum, I'd be happy to directly email you. To Leonard and Tom: Please re-read the facts of the case. McDonald's sold coffee at temperature that was not fit for human consumption. McDonald's had notice of multiple injuries from their practice. McDonald's could have paid her medical bills and been done with it, but decided to press the matter to trial. So a jury of citizens, with full knowledge of all of the facts, made the call. What is so outlandish about that? carl botterud

Originally posted by botterud To Leonard and Tom: Please re-read the facts of the case. McDonald's sold coffee at temperature that was not fit for human consumption. McDonald's had notice of multiple injuries from their practice. McDonald's could have paid her medical bills and been done with it, but decided to press the matter to trial. So a jury of citizens, with full knowledge of all of the facts, made the call. What is so outlandish about that? Carl - I do feel bad that the woman was hurt. However, when I drink tea (I dislike coffee), I like it very hot. I often boil the water, put in the tea bag and then sip it very slowly. It is at least as hot as McD's coffee. But I do NOT put it in my lap. For that matter, I also don't put soda cups, or any other liquid, regardless of temperature, in my lap - and certainly not when driving. Seems to me she made a bad choice and certainly must share some of the responsibility. True story: I was run over by a car when I was 13. I was on my bike, crossing a small side road behind my friend on his bike, and a car turned, hit me, knocked me off my bike and ran over both my legs. The legs didn't break (Jansen's are built with industrial spec parts), but they were pretty banged up. The guy who hit me was 88 years old, senile, and blind as a bat. To add insult to injury, the guy got out of his car and started screaming at me and kicking me (I couldn't move because of my legs). My friend tackled him and they had a fist fight. (A 13 year old vs an 88 year old in a fight - quite a sight.) When all was said and done, lawyers said it was an easy $500,000 settlement (this is 1968, BTW). Here is what my father and mother decided was the correct settlement: 1) My dad smacked me for riding like an idiot. 2) I got a top of the line bike to replace my old beater. 3) I got all my medical bills paid from the incident and all bills paid up until I was 21. 4) They took the guy's licence away permanently. 5) They dropped the charges against my grandmother. She lived near the accident and when my friend ran to her house to tell her what happened, she (76 years old and all 100 lbs of her) came down like the avenging angel of God and beat up the guy. (She was raised in the tough Irish gettos of NYC in the late 1800's) 6) My mom smacked me for riding like an idiot. Admittedly, the guy who hit me got off a bit easy, but I still think that they weren't wrong. -LBJ

Leonard: Great story and a perfectly reasonable result. Note that the jury in the McDonald's case did assess 20% of the blame to the plaintiff and reduced the compensatory damages from $200,000 to $160,000 accordingly. Aquageek: You obviously think that you know the answers, but the simple fact of the matter is you're wrong. You ask any experienced lawyer in my field of the impact of insurance has had on the process, and you'll get an education. It appears to me, however, that you're not particularly interested in exploring the facts, so I'll end it there.

I think our legal system is one of the finest in the world. Having said that, it is flawed in many areas….In my opinion; this is one of the flawed areas. Common sense tells me NOT to drink boiling coffee right off the stove without sipping it to cool it first, (I drink instant coffee which comes directly out of a boiling pot into a cup with one tea spoon of instant coffee). I would never put hot coffee, regardless of temperature in my lap…NEVER….my stuff down there is much to valuable for that degree (pun) of stupidity. "So a jury of citizens, with full knowledge of all of the facts, made the call. What is so outlandish about that?" Nothing if we consider that the jurors listened to the facts regarding O.J. killing his wife and her friend, and I hear the he is playing golf in Florida on a regular basis as opposed to breathing cyanide gas in San Quentin. Justice is not always served…in this case it wasn’t served with the hot coffee (pun again).

By its own corporate standards, McDonald’s sells coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit. A scientist testifying for McDonald’s argued that any coffee hotter than 130 degrees could produce third degree burns. However, a doctor testifying on behalf of Ms. Liebeck noted that it takes less than three seconds to produce a third degree burn at 190 degrees. During trial, McDonald’s admitted that it had known about the risk of serious burns from its coffee for more than 10 years. From 1982 to 1992, McDonald’s received more than 700 reports of burns from scalding coffee; some of the injured were children and infants. Many customers received severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs and buttocks.In addition, many of these claims were settled, amounting to more than $500,000. Tom and others. It is not about HOT coffee. This case was about coffee that is deliberately made to be SCALDING HOT. Spilling it onto your skin can cause 3RD DEGREE BURNS. McDonalds makes it 60 degrees hotter than it should be, that it is the problem and the issue here. Spill some Starbucks coffe on yourself and you are irritated, spill McDonalds coffee on yourself and you end up in hospital. Even after the $2.9 million fine they still serve it at this super high temperature, so the punitive damages were not high enough, perhaps $2,9 billion would make them see sense.

Aha . . . so Aquageek, it sounds like you are, or were, an insurance adjuster. That explains your point of view. As for me, I hung my shingle when I decided that I could no longer tolerate, based on my personal values, doing insurance based defense work. I have seen both sides from the lawyers' perspective, I prefer the pool in which I'm playing now (pun intended).

Starbucks heats their steamed milk to 160 degrees (or higher), apparently hot enough to cause third degree burns. They also sell pastries high in carbs and calories, which when consumed in excess (and in the absence of regular exercise) can contribute to obesity. Forget about personal responsibility. Someone has to put a stop to this before more innocent people are harmed.