The Famous McDonalds Lawsuit & the True Facts

[SuperGuitarman69]

I see many people still have plain and simple commonsense.. She was responsible.. 100% responsible, and the documentary failed.. That is excellent.. I remember when Gore put out An Inconvenient Truth.. Everyone thought the sky was falling.. You cannot cry wolf like that.. People are smart and will find out what the truth really is.. If the left continues to prey on the weak minded they will find out that they will be quickly irrelevant.

[MrCapitalfinal]

I, for one, definitely prefer hot coffee to the boiling point. And the place I often go serves just that way. Obviously there are people that don't like that way so THEY SHOULD GO ELSEWHERE. End of story. I once tried an extremely spiced dosa that cost me weeks of diarrhea. Should I sue that indian restaurant?

[Keopro]

Thanks to studying English in school and Journalism in Uni, I find myself analysing the use of words in videos like this. I heard way too many emotive words (well, he is a lawyer) which often makes the listener/reader more easily persuaded. Take away these words and add in the other figures and his points seem less significant.

[0326hkim]

So in other words, McDonald's intent was to hope that one day someone will spill coffee and get 3rd degree burns? I don't think so.

If that was true, then I would agree that it is the company's fault. Why don't we all sue the companies that put artificial flavor, and other bad ingredients in our food? That is more reasonable.

[ssotelo]

@0326hkim It wasn't a matter of intent. It was a matter of flagrant disregard for the fact that the temperatures had been scalding people. 180 degrees is as hot as the fluid in your car's radiator.

[0326hkim]

@ssotelo you know what, you're right. i saw a documentary recently "hot coffee" i'm trusting everything is unbiased and true, and I learned that it wasnt her intent to sue, but there were 700 ppl that spilled coffee. She pretty much just trying to say "hey lets not let this happen again. secure the lids better or something"

[tothemax01]

@0326hkim But she deliberately removed the lid to add cream to the coffee. She did so with it perched between her knees. She is clearly 100% liable for the injury, she inflicted it on herself.

[oxjr]

@tothemax01 That is an excellent point, but 'causation' is never that simple. Yes it is a hot beverage and she should have been careful, but it was not her accident that was the cause of her 3rd degree burns. The legal term is 'but for' in this case.'but for the excessive heat, a common coffee spill would cause little injury'.

[tothemax01]

@ssotelo Coffee is hot. A company is not liable for the effects of misuse of one of their products. She is 100% liable. One cannot drop a computer on ones foot, causing injury, and then claim 'the computer was too heavy, the manufacturer is liable'. One cannot slip on cleaning fluid on ones kitchen floor and then claim 'the fluid was too slippy, the manufacturer is liable'. Comparisons with coolants are irrelevant. Coffee can reasonably be expected to be up to boiling point (210).

[oxjr]

@0326hkim McDonalds never intended to burn anyone. They simply raised the temperature to reduce the number of refills. They never considered the risk of injury, complaints about accidental burns ignored until this woman's injury - which was too severe to be ignored.