Most Important Photo Tip I Have Learned!
Dec 30, 2018 21:43:27 #
On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee from the drive-through window of a local McDonald's restaurant located at 5001 Gibson Boulevard Southeast. Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of a 1989 Ford Probe which did not have cup holders. Her grandson parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. Liebeck placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap.[10] Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin.[11]
A twelve-person jury reached its verdict on August 18, 1994.[17] Applying the principles of comparative negligence, the jury found that McDonald's was 80% responsible for the incident and Liebeck was 20% at fault. Though there was a warning on the coffee cup, the jury decided that the warning was neither large enough nor sufficient. They awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages, which was then reduced by 20% to $160,000. In addition, they awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages. The jurors apparently arrived at this figure from Morgan's suggestion to penalize McDonald's for one or two days' worth of coffee revenues, which were about $1.35 million per day.[2] The judge reduced punitive damages to $480,000, three times the compensatory amount, for a total of $640,000. 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.[19]
Go to Albuquerque Law School journals and get the real facts of this case. Even a Rag like Huff Post got most of this one right
A twelve-person jury reached its verdict on August 18, 1994.[17] Applying the principles of comparative negligence, the jury found that McDonald's was 80% responsible for the incident and Liebeck was 20% at fault. Though there was a warning on the coffee cup, the jury decided that the warning was neither large enough nor sufficient. They awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages, which was then reduced by 20% to $160,000. In addition, they awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages. The jurors apparently arrived at this figure from Morgan's suggestion to penalize McDonald's for one or two days' worth of coffee revenues, which were about $1.35 million per day.[2] The judge reduced punitive damages to $480,000, three times the compensatory amount, for a total of $640,000. 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.[19]
Go to Albuquerque Law School journals and get the real facts of this case. Even a Rag like Huff Post got most of this one right
Dec 30, 2018 22:08:54 #
Diocletian wrote:
That hot coffee from McDonalds was so hot it melte... (show quote)
Well....it didn't 'MELT' through the cup onto her dress. She was wearing sweats and she spilled it by trying to open the lid while holding it between her legs. It wasn't on the burner for a day, it was served at ~180-185 degrees which was what was requested by customers...HOT COFFEE. She and McDonald's settled for an undisclosed amount after the judge reduced the judgement, including live in nurse care. Facts can be the darnedest things
Dec 30, 2018 22:14:42 #
Vigneron wrote:
Well said
Seems Stardust was the one who was more correct about the incident and nothing snarky about his comment.....She DID spill coffee in her lap while she was holding it between her knees.
ps, she lived to be 91
Dec 30, 2018 23:03:59 #
Gotta love our legal system. At what point do we assume our own personal responsibility, for lack of thought, blaming others for our own errors, law suits fueled by attorneys who think that they can win huge settlements because they twist the system originally set up to protect us? That is why product liability has become absurd. Better chances of winning something here than buying a lottery ticket.
We have a problem and we are all paying for it.
I have been in big high profile business for 40 years, never sued anyone and have never been sued. I do resent the system that allows for continued abuse by opportunistic folks who twist, rather than adding ethical value.
End of rant.
We have a problem and we are all paying for it.
I have been in big high profile business for 40 years, never sued anyone and have never been sued. I do resent the system that allows for continued abuse by opportunistic folks who twist, rather than adding ethical value.
End of rant.
Dec 31, 2018 09:21:10 #
Dec 31, 2018 11:12:26 #
Dec 31, 2018 15:07:59 #
Vigneron wrote:
I thought this was a "Photography Forum"
It's a forum for a lot of photography subjects, see the list of topics at the top....but sometimes they tend to go off on a tangent no matter the issue...
Dec 31, 2018 16:03:54 #
Dec 31, 2018 19:49:02 #
Acountry330 wrote:
Just think about it. These people vote. Happy Shooting.
Put that weapon down, please.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.