🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <502hii$2...@gondor.sdsu.edu>,
Dennis W. Mattison <matt...@rohan.sdsu.edu> wrote:
!Kevin Leslie Schaper (ksch...@darkwing.uoregon.edu) wrote:
!: In article <1996Aug27.1...@nosc.mil>,  <Dennis W. Mattison> wrote:
!: >I don't know about you guys, but I have seen quite a few "stupid" people in my 
!: >lifetime, and wouldn't put it past the intellectually challenged to do 
!: >something like this.  After all, we live in a society in which a woman who 
!: >spilled hot coffee on her sued McDonalds for selling her "hot" coffee (as 
!: >opposed to what, "cold" coffee?).  We gotta remember that human intelligence is 
!: >given on a pretty equal curve (Einstine on the top, most of us in the middle, 
!: >and the unfortunate few on the bottom).
!: >
!: >Dennis

!: You should read up a little more on the woman at McDonalds.. she was pretty 
!: seriously burned, and they kept their coffee signifigantly hotter than was 
!: safe for human consumption.  I did a search and found this:
!: www.seamless.com/consumer/mcdonalds.html

!Come on now, I have spilled several different types of coffee on me (hell, we
!probably all have once upon a time) and McDonalds coffee (at the time it
!spilled in the normal place, my legs and my crotch region, usually when I slam
!on the breaks comming up to a just-turned-red light) was no hotter than Circle
!K or 7-11 coffee.  The hottest coffee I had spill on me came from my own 
!coffee maker, which gave me 1st and 2nd degree burns.  However, you didn't see
!me go out and sue the coffee maker manufacturer cause I spilled coffee on me
!that caused 1st and 2nd degree burns.  No, hell, I am responsible for my
!actions, and it was my fault for putting a hot cup of coffee with no lid on 
!the dashboard of my car while driving into work!  Now I wont discourage a
!woman from suing a company for actual damages...but several million dollars
!for spilling coffee on your leg...give me a break.
!
!Touched a nerve there.  

1. macdonald's, at the time, kept their coffee significantly hotter than other
food service chains.

2. the woman in question was in her car, but parked (not driving) when she was
burned.

3. she had serious burns requiring medical attention.

4. other macdonald's patrons had similarly received serious burns by
macdonald's coffee.

5.  the company had been (warned? directed? requested?) multiple times that
their coffee was far hotter than necessary and causing injuries, but had
refused to make any adjustments.

6. it was clearly demonstrated in court that the company had long known of
the unusual danger of their coffee, had been given opportunity to reduce the
danger, and refused to do so.

what does all this mean?  i don't necessarily think that being burned is worth
millions of dollars, BUT-- the award was mostly punitive damages, in response
to macdonald's demonstrated history of ignoring a danger in their product.

-D-
-- 
By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer meet the
definition of a telephone fax machine.  By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to
send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment, punishable by action to
recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever is greater, for each violation.