Shoplifter sues Wal Mart

[gilraen]

FWIW, that McDonalds case was legitimate. Read the case.

McDonalds purposely sold their coffee at a 180F temp - hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns in 3 seconds. They had been asked to lower the temp, but refused for reasons of profit (no one will stick around long enough to get a second -free- cup).

The woman didn't sue for anything but medical costs. McDonalds refused. The jury awarded her a couple of million, but those cases are always appealed. The appeals court brought the amount down to something much more reasonable. (Will look it up if I get time.)

And the woman will have 3rd degree burn scars on her private parts for the rest of her life.

That was nothing like the pond scum at Mall-Wart. Compare apples to apples, please.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[2ndsupporter]

Maybe his girlfriend is the idiot suing her college for not being able to get a job.

What is WRONG with people?

Exactly! This nation is becoming a world of people who have the mentality of "You Owe Me".

We need Judges that judge more on personal responsibility instead of some loop hole in the law!!!

[cvhoss]

FWIW, that McDonalds case was legitimate. Read the case.

McDonalds purposely sold their coffee at a 180F temp - hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns in 3 seconds. They had been asked to lower the temp, but refused for reasons of profit (no one will stick around long enough to get a second -free- cup).

The woman didn't sue for anything but medical costs. McDonalds refused. The jury awarded her a couple of million, but those cases are always appealed. The appeals court brought the amount down to something much more reasonable. (Will look it up if I get time.)

And the woman will have 3rd degree burn scars on her private parts for the rest of her life.

That was nothing like the pond scum at Mall-Wart. Compare apples to apples, please.

I am comparing apples to apples. What I'm comparing has nothing to do with criminal actions but with personal responsibility. And the coffee case wasn't legitimate as far as I'm concerned. No more legitimate than someone who buys a gun, loads it, cocks it, points it at their foot and pulls the trigger and injures theirself. Should they be allowed to sue the gun manufacturer for their own stupidity? The coffee cup didn't fail and the coffee didn't jump out of the cup. A product which by it's very nature is served hot was spilled in her own lap as a direct result of her own actions. Just as the injuries to the crook at Wal-Mart were caused by his own actions.

Hoss

[TucAzRider]

FWIW, that McDonalds case was legitimate. Read the case.

McDonalds purposely sold their coffee at a 180F temp - hot enough to cause 3rd degree burns in 3 seconds. They had been asked to lower the temp, but refused for reasons of profit (no one will stick around long enough to get a second -free- cup).

The woman didn't sue for anything but medical costs. McDonalds refused. The jury awarded her a couple of million, but those cases are always appealed. The appeals court brought the amount down to something much more reasonable. (Will look it up if I get time.)

And the woman will have 3rd degree burn scars on her private parts for the rest of her life.

That was nothing like the pond scum at Mall-Wart. Compare apples to apples, please.

Dang,. You should go to work for CNN,. You almost had me convinced for a second,. WOW..

But for real, if someone get's a cup of coffee,. They have to know spilling it on them will cause burns,. Not rocket science there,. For her to collect money for her stupidity is wrong,. Just plain wrong,. As mentioned above with the gun scenario,. A person takes the responsiblity for what they buy,. Coffee is hot,. That is life.. They shouldn't be driving with hot coffee anyway..

[Reborn]

Makes me wonder which rock his lawyer crawled out from.....

[jumpwing]

The McD lady held the cup of coffee between her thighs while operating a car. Her stupidity merits neither medical expense reimbursement nor a settlement of any kind. I don't give a crap why McD was serving coffee at 180; it couldn't have been that bad because nobody else seemed to have a problem with it.

This clown at WM created the potential for his own injuries and detainment. I'm sick of criminals getting compensated because they met with less-than-perfect resistance from non-experts. You don't get to claim protection of the law while you break it. We're not talking about trained authorities who cruelly and deliberately injured a guy, we're talking about an accident that resulted from a situation created by the criminal.

This example is a bit extreme, but it makes the point: If you wrestle with a burglar who has just broken into your home, and he dies because you only tried to knock him out with a heavy object, then you've just applied a death sentence to a crime that didn't deserve it. Should you be liable? Or is the criminal at fault for opening that can of worms in the first place?

Sorry, no sale. I'm sick and tired of criminals collecting "Workman's Comp."

[dukalmighty]

In some countries they cut off your right hand for stealing! We need to be somewhere between the extremes--where committing such crimes becomes less attractive.

Cut off his left hand

[kazzaerexys]

Dang,. You should go to work for CNN,. You almost had be convinced for a second,. WOW..

That's because she's right.

But for real, if someone get's a cup of coffee,. They have to know spilling it on them will cause burns[...]

Not third degree.

The woman was the passenger. The car was stopped so she could add cream and sugar. The spillage was a normal, routine oopsie like anybody might experience with any cup of coffee. The result was third degree burns. The burns were so severe because Mickey D's was serving their coffee at near boiling temperatures to avoid having to rebrew too often. There had been over 700 complaints against the store for coffee-related burns due to this practice, but they continued to keep it too hot in order to save a few pennies in wasted coffee. Among those 700+ complaints, McDonald's had paid over a half million dollars in settlements.

The plaintiff sued for $20k to cover medical costs. Mickey D's offered to settle for $800. The jury awarded the plaintiff $200k in compensatory damages and hit the restaurant for $2.7M in punitive damages because of the extensive complaint history. During the appeal, Mickey D's settled for $600k out of court.

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

As mentioned above with the gun scenario,. A person takes the responsiblity for what they buy.

And the appropriate gun analogy would be a factory round blowing up your gun and shredding your face in the process. That's worth a bit more than eight-hundred bucks, I think.

[miklcolt45]

Loss of earnings? How much was he making with his thefts?

And then prosecute for not income tax evasion on every penny he didn't declare and pay taxes on.

[varob]

When big corporations settle, it says to the BG's, come to our store and take what you want and if we catch you, just put up a little struggle and sue us for damages
If I were a thief, I'd be spending a lot of time at WW.

[cvhoss]

That's because she's right.

Sorry, she's not.

Not third degree.

The woman was the passenger. The car was stopped so she could add cream and sugar. The spillage was a normal, routine oopsie like anybody might experience with any cup of coffee.

Let's see. You buy a bottle of bleach for your laundry. You pour some in a cup to add to the machine and drop the cup which splashes bleach into your eyes causing damage to your eyes. Is the bleach manufacturer or the Wal-Mart you bought the bleach from at fault for your clumsiness? No. The bleach is a known caustic and if you mishandle it, it's your fault. Same with a hot cup of coffee. It's known to be hot and if you mishandle it, it's your fault.

The result was third degree burns. The burns were so severe because Mickey D's was serving their coffee at near boiling temperatures to avoid having to rebrew too often. There had been over 700 complaints against the store for coffee-related burns due to this practice, but they continued to keep it too hot in order to save a few pennies in wasted coffee.

Again wrong. Keeping coffee at that temperature would in fact cost them money as it will begin to "burn" and turn bitter much quicker than if held at a lower temperature. They were following guidelines published by The National Coffee Association:

The National Coffee Association instructs that coffee be brewed “between 195-205 degrees Fahrenheit [91–96 °C] for optimal extraction” and consumed “immediately”. If not consumed immediately, the coffee is to be “maintained at 180-185 degrees Fahrenheit.”

Among those 700+ complaints, McDonald's had paid over a half million dollars in settlements.

The plaintiff sued for $20k to cover medical costs.

Wrong. She asked for $20,000.00 after the injury but prior to hiring an attorney. It was when McDonald's only offered $800.00 that she hired an attorney. The Wiki article doesn't state how much was requested in the original suit, but you can bet it was more than the $20,000.00.

Mickey D's offered to settle for $800. The jury awarded the plaintiff $200k in compensatory damages and hit the restaurant for $2.7M in punitive damages because of the extensive complaint history. During the appeal, Mickey D's settled for $600k out of court.

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

Wrong. No one but the involved parties knows the amount of the settlement.

The decision was appealed by both McDonald's and Liebeck in December 1994, but the parties settled out of court for an undisclosed amount less than $600,000.

And the appropriate gun analogy would be a factory round blowing up your gun and shredding your face in the process. That's worth a bit more than eight-hundred bucks, I think.

Wrong. That would indicate a defective round. There was nothing defective about the coffee cup. If you want to compare it to an accident as opposed to an intentional act compare it to removing a loaded round from a box of ammo to load in your gun at the range. You drop the round and the primer strikes a piece of gravel and discharges shooting you in the leg. Not the ammo manufacturer's fault that you dropped the round as the ammo did exactly what it was supposed to do; fire when the primer was struck.

This lawsuit was ridiculous and should have been laughed out of court. Also contained in the article you and I have both linked to:

Similar lawsuits against McDonald's in the United Kingdom failed. In Bogle v. McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd. Field J rejected the claim that McDonald's could have avoided injury by serving not-so-hot coffee.

"If this submission be right, McDonald’s should not have served drinks at any temperature which would have caused a bad scalding injury. The evidence is that tea or coffee served at a temperature of 65 C will cause a deep thickness burn if it is in contact with the skin for just two seconds. Thus, if McDonald’s were going to avoid the risk of injury by a deep thickness burn they would have had to have served tea and coffee at between 55 C and 60 C. But tea ought to be brewed with boiling water if it is to give its best flavour and coffee ought to be brewed at between 85 C and 95 C. Further, people generally like to allow a hot drink to cool to the temperature they prefer. Accordingly, I have no doubt that tea and coffee served at between 55 C and 60 C would not have been acceptable to McDonald’s customers. Indeed, on the evidence, I find that the public want to be able to buy tea and coffee served hot, that is to say at a temperature of at least 65 C, even though they know (as I think they must be taken to do for the purposes of answering issues (1) and (2)) that there is a risk of a scalding injury if the drink is spilled."[12]

Though defenders of the Liebeck verdict argue that her coffee was unusually hotter than other coffee sold, other major vendors of coffee, including Starbucks, Dunkin' Donuts, Wendy's, and Burger King, produce coffee at a similar or higher temperature, and have been subjected to similar lawsuits over third-degree burns.[17]

Home and commercial coffee makers often reach comparable temperatures

McDonald's sold the product as advertised and as expected by their customers. Had the women ordered iced coffee and been burnt, she would have a lawsuit. But she ordered regular coffee which is served hot. No manufacturer should be responsible for our own clumsiness or neglect when the product is performing as anticipated. Drop your chainsaw and cut off your foot -- your fault. The saw worked as intended. Take your hands off the steering wheel to comb your hair and crash into a guardrail -- your fault. The car performed as intended. What it comes down to is that the woman was injured through her own actions. Had she not spilled the coffee and it was cooler, she would probably have complained to the McDonald's that her coffee was cold.

Hoss

[PastorPack]

Mental anguish! Give him a buck and tell him to rethink his life.

[TucAzRider]

That's because she's right.


The woman was the passenger. The car was stopped so she could add cream and sugar. The spillage was a normal, routine oopsie like anybody might experience with any cup of coffee. The result was third degree burns.

I have know idea what sorta crack your on, but I suggest you get rehab very soon.. I don't care WHO she is, if you take the responsiblity of driving and get in a crash,. YOUR responsible for your accident,. If you ride a motorcycle and crash, that is again YOUR responsiblity,... If you get out of bed and slip on the rug,.. AGAIN it is YOUR responsiblity,. People have to start taking responsiblity for what they do,. STOP BLAMING OTHERS..... I don't drink coffee when driving, I have spilled and it did burn,. If I smoked I wouldn't when I was driving,. Ashes (from what I hear) can burn when dropped too... By anyone agreeing with you, they are adding to a major problem with this country, everyone is out to blame everyone else for there problems instead of looking at there own fault,. Sue happy people,....


BTW - cvhoss, I love your post,. Good job on that,..

[kazzaerexys]

I have know idea what sorta crack your on, but I suggest you get rehab very soon..

I am glad to know that you think anybody's product can disfigure you for life and it is your own fault for buying it in the first place. Way to man up.

Me, I don't have a problem holding others responsible for their negligence when it is appropriate. That's why we have a civil court system in the first place---people are supposed to be held accountable with their wallets when they screw up in a non-criminal way. It's the civilized alternative to duels and vigilanteism

Just because some judges don't have the brain cells to throw out some suits with prejudice does not mean that all lawsuits are bad things, even some that sound superficially silly. That makes about as much sense as saying that all criminal verdicts are bad and we should do away with criminal court system because there are some judges who don't know how to do their jobs.

[Bunny]

Mental anguish! Give him a swift kick in the pants and tell him to rethink his life.

Fixed it for ya, Pastor. *grin* lol