Hot Coffee vs McDonald's 2

20 years after the first hot coffee lawsuit, there's a second one.

Link

Didn't see a topic, so... Discuss.

She burned herself two years ago and she's just NOW suing? Really?

Some people don't pay attention to what the **** they are doing. I've NEVER spilled a drink all over myself. My wife? At least 6 times a week. BECAUSE SHE DOESNT PAY THE **** ATTENTION SDOFGKNSD!!!!!!11

/rant

While in the statute of limitations, waiting two years is odd.

However, if they improperly put the lid on and that caused a burn, she should be compensated for medical bills that she is out. But there is not enough in the article to pass real judgement.

What I find extremely odd is that the story was posted 2 days before the Statute of limitations expired....(If I am reading correctly, for civil cases in CA, it's 2 years for personal injury?)

Found the LA Times article of it helps.

That's how you know she's a keeper.

Here story seems pretty much unprovable unless they have pictures or video

And if you look at the original Hot Coffee lawsuit, the coffee was served too hot as it was at a temperature that would cause third degree burns, and had caused burns to previous customers

someone posted a New York Times archived video that chronicles the whole affair in OT a little while back, I was too young to understand all that had happened but I remember that people joked about it a lot, but upon revisiting the topic I see the woman had lots of grounds for complaint, and she initially didn't want more than compensation for hospital costs associated with her injuries, there were several hundred other cases with McDonald's over the issue as well, McDonald's was serving coffee capable in inflicting third degree burns

anyhow, I think this is the same video from the previous poster...

http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000002507537/scalded-by-coffee-then-news-media.html

initially she won her case, people thought she got too much from her court award but that's kind of the point of punitive damages, it was supposed to amount to a few days of McDonald's coffee sales for a single year, again kind of the point of punitive damages, designed to discourage the offending party for continuing behavior, McDonald's knew their coffee was hurting people and still proposed a continued risk, and refused adjust their practices

as for this case, this might just be someone trying to get rich, but who is to say at this point, it'll be interesting to see if she can produce medical records to substantiate this

Well her settlement was changed after the decision

Im on the side of McDonald's and every other place that serves hot drinks. What these people expecting when they get coffee? Are they expecting it to be cold when they get it?

Probably not expecting third degree burns

It wasn't that the coffee was hot it was that it was at a temperature that was far hotter than coffee should or needs to be. If you spill normal coffee on yourself you will probably receive some minor burns and a bit of pain. You shouldn't however get 3rd degree burns from spilling coffee on yourself. That was the purpose of the lawsuit. If the coffee had been at a normal temperature the lawsuit would not have gone anywhere.

Yeah as others have said, educate yourself on the earlier matter apostle

Anyone who sides with McDonalds should check out the documentary available on Netflix titled..."Hot Coffee". You will see the gruesome burns the woman received. They were so severe she needed large skin grafts. As others have already said, McDonalds received dozens of complaints about their coffee's temperature, yet still instructed all locations to keep their coffee at 180 degrees Fahrenheit. Unfortunately for all of us, the media and politicians ignored the seriousness of the case and laughed it off, creating bills and laws favoring corporations to prevent "frivolous lawsuits". Now there are limitations on the amount of money you can collect in damages that in some cases don't come close to covering the costs involved in negligent "accidents".

This, its like selling a sandwich that if you drop... explodes and requires a double amputation of your legs. Sure you were clumsy and shouldnt have dropped the sandwich. But i shouldnt be selling exploding sandwiches in the first place.

You shouldnt need skin grafts because you spilled your coffee.

Sure, I could see McDonald's should be held responsible for unreasonably hot coffee. Having the temperature of the coffee at 180ºF goes well above the warning label of the cup. If people are complaining to McDonalds that their coffee is too hot and someone gets burns over it, then yes I could see a case where they should be held accountable.

My issue to all this, I dont want to become a warning label society, where everywhere we go have to have a warning label. There got to be some responsibility on everyone's part before needing a warning label. Even still, people should know that when they get coffee that it should naturally be hot without the need of a warning label saying so. Ever since that woman got burned, we all have to see caution hot on every cup we buy from a restaurant.

We already are a warning label society

Thought this thread was going to be about the Hot Coffee mod in GTA: San Andreas lol