GeorgeH Loc: Jonesboro, GA

Wow! This post must have been a pathetic attempt at humor. Have another cup of coffee and chill out.!

Rose42

Stupid people rewarded with money. Only in America. Lol

letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.

You are so right, it was the Mound of Venus that was scalded.

KWK Loc: Southeast Mich

It's amazing that people of Canada can talk about their Country being so good and say how bad the USA is and still have to find a way into the states to vacation or Winter over.. Yes the Snowbirds are really upset

soba1 Loc: Somewhere In So Ca

.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

You didn't say "It's not McDonald's fault she was injured". You said "it isn't McDonald's fault the coffee was too hot". A jury who heard all the evidence (I did not) found in her favor. That doesn't really prove who was right and who was wrong, but it would tend to indicate that she had a case.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

That's an interesting detail.

Many years ago I happened to be at McDonald's when I saw an incident between an elderly Brit and a young employee. He asked for a tea, so the young girl poured hot water from a "Bunn" carafe into a cup. He shouted at her, "You kaunt make teeeee without booooiling woooater!" The problem was that the hot water in the carafe was not visibly bubbling. My thoughts were 1) it is not her fault; she has no control over the equipment set up by management; 2) if you want "real tea" why would you be going to McDonald's; and 3) I wish I would have had a bell jar and vacuum pump so that I could make ice water visibly "boil" and then serve the "boiling tea" on his head!

If the lady had wanted an iced coffee she should have asked for it. And she should have been more careful. You can't legislate stupid out of people.

berchman Loc: South Central PA

It would be helpful to know the facts of this case of spilled coffee:

The “McDonald’s coffee” case. We have all heard it: a woman spills McDonald's coffee, sues and gets $3 million. Here are the facts of this widely misreported and misunderstood case:

Stella Liebeck, 79 years old, was sitting in the passenger seat of her grandson’s car having purchased a cup of McDonald’s coffee. After the car stopped, she tried to hold the cup securely between her knees while removing the lid. However, the cup tipped over, pouring scalding hot coffee onto her. She received third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, necessitating hospitalization for eight days, whirlpool treatment for debridement of her wounds, skin grafting, scarring, and disability for more than two years.

Despite these extensive injuries, she offered to settle with McDonald’s for $20,000. However, McDonald’s refused to settle. The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages -- reduced to $160,000 because the jury found her 20 percent at fault -- and $2.7 million in punitive damages for McDonald’s callous conduct. (To put this in perspective, McDonald's revenue from coffee sales alone is in excess of $1.3 million a day.) The trial judge reduced the punitive damages to $480,000. Subsequently, the parties entered a post-verdict settlement.

According to Stella Liebeck’s attorney, S. Reed Morgan, the jury heard the following evidence in the case:

By corporate specifications, McDonald's sells its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit;
Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the skin is burned away down to the muscle/fatty-tissue layer) in two to seven seconds;
Third-degree burns do not heal without skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability of the victim for many months, and in some cases, years
The chairman of the department of mechanical engineering and bio-mechanical engineering at the University of Texas testified that this risk of harm is unacceptable, as did a widely recognized expert on burns, the editor in chief of the leading scholarly publication in the specialty, the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation;
McDonald's admitted that it has known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years -- the risk was brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits, to no avail;
From 1982 to 1992, McDonald's coffee burned more than 700 people, many receiving severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and buttocks;
Not only men and women, but also children and infants, have been burned by McDonald's scalding hot coffee, in some instances due to inadvertent spillage by McDonald's employees;
At least one woman had coffee dropped in her lap through the service window, causing third-degree burns to her inner thighs and other sensitive areas, which resulted in disability for years;
Witnesses for McDonald's admitted in court that consumers are unaware of the extent of the risk of serious burns from spilled coffee served at McDonald's required temperature;
McDonald's admitted that it did not warn customers of the nature and extent of this risk and could offer no explanation as to why it did not;
McDonald's witnesses testified that it did not intend to turn down the heat -- As one witness put it: “No, there is no current plan to change the procedure that we're using in that regard right now;”
McDonald's admitted that its coffee is “not fit for consumption” when sold because it causes severe scalds if spilled or drunk;
Liebeck's treating physician testified that her injury was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen.
Moreover, the Shriner’s Burn Institute in Cincinnati had published warnings to the franchise food industry that its members were unnecessarily causing serious scald burns by serving beverages above 130 degrees Fahrenheit.

In refusing to grant a new trial in the case, Judge Robert Scott called McDonald's behavior “callous.” Moreover, “the day after the verdict, the news media documented that coffee at the McDonald's in Albuquerque [where Liebeck was burned] is now sold at 158 degrees. This will cause third-degree burns in about 60 seconds, rather than in two to seven seconds [so that], the margin of safety has been increased as a direct consequence of this verdict.”

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

cwp3420

Not true. You’re once again talking about Canada, where dictators can change your miserable lives on a whim.

cwp3420

Trump is still ruling your mind, I see. Poor, poor, John. On your headstone, it will say “But Trump...” etched into stone.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Precisely.
Just what the democrats want to do to America by doing away with the Constitution that they hate so much.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Here in America vs the rest of the world including the socialist utopia of Canada.

cwp3420

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

In the US, the police are too worried about being blasted to pull over people for no reason. OK, sorry, that was in poor taste.

About 13 months ago, back in March of 2020, I carried a letter from my employer that I was supposed to show if I ever got stopped for being out and about. It's probably still in my truck somewhere. I never heard of anyone being stopped. This was during those "two weeks to stop the spread". To think that Canada is still in this mode is concerning.