An utter world of shit...

[Croc]

That was incompetence on the woman's part. She put the coffee cup between her legs. Coffee cups are supposed to go in a cupholder.

Yes, which is why she was 20% at fault. McDonald's wasn't serving their coffee any cooler for dine-in sales, and clearly that's intended for immediate consumption. If you're serving product so hot that any spill whatsoever results in a skin graft, it seems just a little excessive to me.

[Justin Bimmer]

Yes, which is why she was 20% at fault. McDonald's wasn't serving their coffee any cooler for dine-in sales, and clearly that's intended for immediate consumption. If you're serving product so hot that any spill whatsoever results in a skin graft, it seems just a little excessive to me.

McDonald's admitted they were super heating their coffee to HIDE the fact that they used cheap, inferior coffee beans.

[NEXTEL CUP]

The Woman won the Mcdonald's case because according to Federal Law if you heat a liquid to a certian set tempeture it is considered a dangerous substance and their are certain laws that go with it on how the Hot liquid must be stored and handled. In the Mcdonalds case, Mcdonald"s had a policy of heating thier coffee to an extreme tempeture that under federal law it qualified the coffee as a dangeroue substance and required it to be treated as stated above. Therefore becasue the Coffee was just inan ordinary Coffee Cup Mcdonalds was liable and neglagent. All Coffee house are aware of this case and that is why thye will only heat your Coffee to a certain Tempeture.

[Nick]

We went over this case in my business law course, briefed it, and a report was done on it by a student, so I'm going to try and recall some information...

According to the national coffee association I believe the temperature of the coffee was well within a suitable range to provide for best taste. McDonalds was not negligent in the regard of temperature, rather, they were negligent in the regard of not clearly labeling and notifying the recipient of how hot the contents were.

When the coffee spilled on the woman, (who happened to be parked at the time if I remember correctly), it took her around 70-90 seconds (also if I remember correctly) before she changed her position from sitting in the hot coffee. This is where the woman's negligence came into play.

[capriceman]

According to the national coffee association

Theres a National Coffee Association!??

[toesuf94]

Theres a National Coffee Association!??

I was thinking the same damned thing!!!!

But then again: http://aveoclub.proboards.com/index.cgi this exists!

[Justin Bimmer]

Theres a National Coffee Association!??

I'm sure it is a lot like other "associations" that make stuff up to benefit their clients.

[SAmadei]

Theres a National Coffee Association!??

Apparently so...

www.ncausa.org

Interesting... reminds me of the broccoli.com website years ago.

[capriceman]

I was thinking the same damned thing!!!!

But then again: http://aveoclub.proboards.com/index.cgi this exists!

sorry to hijack a serious thread but, http://aveoclub.proboards.com/index.cgi?bo...&thread=982

I :rotflmao: When I read that he tried to race a charger!

[cletus8269]

Chris, don't be a fool. The McDonald's coffee case was won by the plaintiff because McDonald's was behaving recklessly with their serving temperatures. Do some basic research on this case before you trot it out as an example of a frivolous lawsuit because anyone who DOES know about this case will immediately discount you as talking out of your ass.

http://www.caoc.com/CA/index.cfm?event=showPage&pg=facts

in my mind its the fact that people feel they are owed something due to their stupidity. case in point coffee = hot. thats not math either thats common sense, the stuff she missed out on evidently. the judicial system is so tied up with utter crap like these no brainer things it kills me. like the guy that broke into a home and then SUED the home owner when he shot him.

the woman should not have slapped them with a lawsuit, the judge should have slapped her for being stupid without a license.

[trinacriabob]

in my mind its the fact that people feel they are owed something due to their stupidity. case in point coffee = hot. thats not math either thats common sense, the stuff she missed out on evidently. the judicial system is so tied up with utter crap like these no brainer things it kills me. like the guy that broke into a home and then SUED the home owner when he shot him.

the woman should not have slapped them with a lawsuit, the judge should have slapped her for being stupid without a license.

This is symptomatic of everything that is wrong in this country, and probably the whole "Western World."

In short, we are:

- civilly too harsh

- criminally too lenient

- the educated white male of European stock is blamed for everything

- political correctness trumps logic and reason (reverse discrimination in securing admission to competitive academic programs, for example)

Basically, it is one big C-L-U-S-T-E-R-F-U-C-K.

[intrigued]

^^^

affitmative action needs to end ... period.

A great example of how messed it is occured in New Haven CT recently.

The fire department issued an exam you had to pass for promotions. They went on to throw out the exam and have it redesigned to be easier when no african american firefighters passed it. All those who passed it, predominetly white fire fighters, got screwed and didn't get promotions because of this.

Now I have nothing against diversity, I judge people of every skin and race on their merrits. Diversity for the sake of diversity needs to stop because of situations like this where they try to dumb down a test so that people who are not knowledgable enough for a position can qualify for it. It's unfair and in a situation like this unsafe even.

Fortunatley a lawsuit was brought by the New Haven Firefighters and they got the original exam and results upheald so no underqualified firefighters were awarded the promotion because they were a different race.

I don't want to be though of as a dispassionate person, I belive in helping underprivlaged people but I think it should be done solely on the merrits, not on skin color.

[Justin Bimmer]

I would like to remind everybody that we have a Politics and Social Issues Forum that everybody has access to if they ask for permission. This thread might end up there if it keeps going down this path.

[SoCalCTS]

In short, we are:

- civilly too harsh

- criminally too lenient

- the educated white male of European stock is blamed for everything

- political correctness trumps logic and reason (reverse discrimination in securing admission to competitive academic programs, for example)

Basically, it is one big C-L-U-S-T-E-R-F-U-C-K.

Wow.. oh white people get blamed for everything. Just watch Fox News and you will see that Mexicans and blacks are blamed for everything. Or is it gays? I mean they even boiled the healthcare debate down to blaming "illegal immigrants".

Oh poor poor European males. I cant remember anytime they ever got blamed for anything!!!!

And as for the New Haven, CT commentary. The test scores indicate that the test was biased. Think about it.

what if a test was written with math questions about football. Such as what if the home team scored 4 touchdowns and 3 field goals how much would that equal? This would be a biased question favoring people that watch football.

In the same way would it be fair to you if they asked questions about Hannukah or Soccer on a standardized test that you were taking?

The fact that no African Americans passed doesnt mean that the Whites were smarter or better. It does raise questions about the fairness of the test.

Edited September 15, 2009 by SoCalCTS

[Robert Hall]

..

what if a test was written with math questions about football. Such as what if the home team scored 4 touchdowns and 3 field goals how much would that equal? This would be a biased question favoring people that watch football.

This reminds me of an incident last year..

I had a job interview question that asked about chess moves and strategy...I've never played it in my life, said so, and improvised...

[A Horse With No Name]

You might try Chess and like it, Cubical...

About to play a few rounds with my younger son.

Chris

[A Horse With No Name]

I would like to remind everybody that we have a Politics and Social Issues Forum that everybody has access to if they ask for permission. This thread might end up there if it keeps going down this path.

We may wish to close this thread and start a new one in the politics section.

Thank you everyone for your concern and response about my son. He's had a rough summer...

But he's doing really much better at the moment, so I am pretty happy for him right now.

Chris

[capriceman]

You might try Chess and like it, Cubical...

About to play a few rounds with my younger son.

The best thing about playing with kids is that they dont think ahead. They live for the moment.

[A Horse With No Name]

Actually our local library has regular tournaments. My eleven year old son regularly beats adults who have been playing for quite some time, and can beat most of the teens in the library chess league.

I'm going upstairs to take an after work shower, after which I'm going to probably get owned by an eleven year old.

And hell, I was on the Chess Team in high school.

Chris

[capriceman]

confuse him and bring the queen out first!

[Robert Hall]

You might try Chess and like it, Cubical...

About to play a few rounds with my younger son.

Chris

I'm sure I would..

Yes, it's odd that I never picked it up. Just one of those things.

Rob

[Z-06]

It is a relatively difficult game. I love chess. That is what I do going home. Crank Mr. Fritz, Shredder or Zappa and get ready to be F$cked.

[Drew Dowdell]

confuse him and bring the queen out first!

Oh I always do that when I'm in a jam.l

[ocnblu]

Yup, "We Are The Champions", "Another One Bites The Dust"... or the big gun, "Bohemian Rhapsody" is dad gummed gar-awn-TEED to flummox your opponent ever' time!

[Croc]

in my mind its the fact that people feel they are owed something due to their stupidity. case in point coffee = hot. thats not math either thats common sense, the stuff she missed out on evidently. the judicial system is so tied up with utter crap like these no brainer things it kills me. like the guy that broke into a home and then SUED the home owner when he shot him.

the woman should not have slapped them with a lawsuit, the judge should have slapped her for being stupid without a license.

Put your preconceived notions on hold and try to learn something. Here is how law works: each case is decided on the FACTS of the case. Many cases with similar facts are decided differently, and that is primarily due to differing NUANCES. Let's try and draw some important distinctions:

You expect hot coffee to be hot...but do you expect it to be SCALDING? Scalding means capable of causing severe burns requiring SKIN GRAFTS with even brief contact.

What about in a sit-down restaurant? You're served soup...of course you expect it to be hot, but you don't expect it to be served straight from a boiling pot without any time to cool because COMMON SENSE dictates that you serve soup AFTER allowing it to cool for a minute. Look at a soup can--almost always says "Let cool for 1-2 minutes prior to serving."

Did you mother serve casseroles straight out of the oven while they were still bubbling? Of course not! No one puts a plate of food in front of a family without letting it cool for a minute or two because it's COMMON SENSE to avoid potentially injurous situations for your spouse and children.

This is why McDonald's was negligent--they served their coffee EXCEPTIONALLY hot--hotter than anyone else did at the time, UNEXPECTEDLY HOT, and they failed to warn their customers about it in a manner that was deemed adequate by a court and a jury. Now you cannot miss the "Caution: HOT!" labels, whereas before there was an approximately size 3 font around the bottom of the cup.

[Justin Bimmer]

To add to what Croc said, the term "common sense" is often replaced with "what would a reasonable person in similar circumstances do." That is typically the test that is used in court in order to apply facts to a set of laws.

[ocnblu]

Grandmother always said when I was a little boy, "blow on it, it's hot!"

And then I grew up and I didn't need my dear grandmother to remind me, because she taught me at a young age.

[cletus8269]

Put your preconceived notions on hold and try to learn something. Here is how law works: each case is decided on the FACTS of the case. Many cases with similar facts are decided differently, and that is primarily due to differing NUANCES. Let's try and draw some important distinctions:

You expect hot coffee to be hot...but do you expect it to be SCALDING? Scalding means capable of causing severe burns requiring SKIN GRAFTS with even brief contact.

What about in a sit-down restaurant? You're served soup...of course you expect it to be hot, but you don't expect it to be served straight from a boiling pot without any time to cool because COMMON SENSE dictates that you serve soup AFTER allowing it to cool for a minute. Look at a soup can--almost always says "Let cool for 1-2 minutes prior to serving."

Did you mother serve casseroles straight out of the oven while they were still bubbling? Of course not! No one puts a plate of food in front of a family without letting it cool for a minute or two because it's COMMON SENSE to avoid potentially injurous situations for your spouse and children.

This is why McDonald's was negligent--they served their coffee EXCEPTIONALLY hot--hotter than anyone else did at the time, UNEXPECTEDLY HOT, and they failed to warn their customers about it in a manner that was deemed adequate by a court and a jury. Now you cannot miss the "Caution: HOT!" labels, whereas before there was an approximately size 3 font around the bottom of the cup.

Learn something? like in physical science when they teach you that a state of matter is hotter than another state of matter you see the difference in how the air around it behaves i.e. steam? soup is hot like coffee is hot. steam tells me that hey this is hotter than its surroundings. it only takes once (sometimes more for others) to realize that if something looks hot it possibly is. i didnt ask my parents to sue GM growing up because there wasnt a label on my dads 77 corvette saying "caution seats may be hot if left in direct sunlight".

On the other hand, McDonalds being fed up with people complaining about the coffee being cold may have aimed for higher temps to give themselves a buffer zone so complaints would be fewer. my 7th grade history teacher drank hot (i cant believe it has to be differentiated) coffee year round from a thermos. so hot that at 2 in the afternoon you could see it steaming from the back of the class. did they have to make it that hot? no they could have sent it out the door at 120 F and been fine but the fact that someone has to be told "hey dont spill this coffee on yourself cause its hot" is absurd.

common sense is the absolute least common thing to be found on this planet right now, much less this country and the law books encourage it. 50 yrs ago it you fell down in a public place you got up looked around and made sure no one saw you out of embarassment. now people look around to see if anyone or camera and think how much is this worth.

To add to what Croc said, the term "common sense" is often replaced with "what would a reasonable person in similar circumstances do." That is typically the test that is used in court in order to apply facts to a set of laws.

thats the downfall of it.

Grandmother always said when I was a little boy, "blow on it, it's hot!"

And then I grew up and I didn't need my dear grandmother to remind me, because she taught me at a young age.

thank you...

[Justin Bimmer]

Now that we have had our science lesson. Think about this: what would be reasonable for McDonald's to do? Serve super hot coffee to people without warning to mask the fact that their coffee tastes like $h!? McDonald's was serving their coffee HOTTER than what would be considered reasonable. We didn't have a super proliferation of coffee back when this case was handled. Now, there are proper warnings about the heat in commercial coffee, problem solved.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Learn something? like in physical science when they teach you that a state of matter is hotter than another state of matter you see the difference in how the air around it behaves i.e. steam? soup is hot like coffee is hot. steam tells me that hey this is hotter than its surroundings. it only takes once (sometimes more for others) to realize that if something looks hot it possibly is. i didnt ask my parents to sue GM growing up because there wasnt a label on my dads 77 corvette saying "caution seats may be hot if left in direct sunlight".

On the other hand, McDonalds being fed up with people complaining about the coffee being cold may have aimed for higher temps to give themselves a buffer zone so complaints would be fewer. my 7th grade history teacher drank hot (i cant believe it has to be differentiated) coffee year round from a thermos. so hot that at 2 in the afternoon you could see it steaming from the back of the class. did they have to make it that hot? no they could have sent it out the door at 120 F and been fine but the fact that someone has to be told "hey dont spill this coffee on yourself cause its hot" is absurd.

common sense is the absolute least common thing to be found on this planet right now, much less this country and the law books encourage it. 50 yrs ago it you fell down in a public place you got up looked around and made sure no one saw you out of embarassment. now people look around to see if anyone or camera and think how much is this worth.

This...

(I won't say what I really want to for fear of whiny posts and a closed thread)

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Now that we have had our science lesson. Think about this: what would be reasonable for McDonald's to do? Serve super hot coffee to people without warning to mask the fact that their coffee tastes like $h!? McDonald's was serving their coffee HOTTER than what would be considered reasonable. We didn't have a super proliferation of coffee back when this case was handled. Now, there are proper warnings about the heat in commercial coffee, problem solved.

Sorry man...

I just don't buy it.

By that same logic, what constitutes "super hot" over "hot" Is there some scientific formula? But that wouldn't account for varying taste. Is it by mass consensus? That doesn't seem likely given the LACK of complaints

I mean, MCD probably sold thousands of cups of coffee at that temperature, yet ONE person complained

[Justin Bimmer]

Sorry man...

I just don't buy it.

By that same logic, what constitutes "super hot" over "hot" Is there some scientific formula? But that wouldn't account for varying taste. Is it by mass consensus? That doesn't seem likely given the LACK of complaints

I mean, MCD probably sold thousands of cups of coffee at that temperature, yet ONE person complained

The jury are the ones who determine if it is too hot or not hot enough.

The whole fallacy of the argument that people are weak and its the law's fault that people can trip and sue and other asinine things fail to realize that it is the JURY (regular people) that must determine if the facts are sufficient to apply the law.

So in essence, it is normal people that are turning America into a place where it is acceptable to sue after tripping and falling.

[cletus8269]

The whole fallacy of the argument that people are weak and its the law's fault that people can trip and sue and other asinine things fail to realize that it is the JURY (regular people) that must determine if the facts are sufficient to apply the law.

So in essence, it is normal people that are turning America into a place where it is acceptable to sue after tripping and falling.

sure, by all means put hot on the cup, why it wasnt on there is beyond me. up until that point though people understood the coffee was hot. i'm not going to steer the thread off course anymore, im just saying for what its worth most lawsuits that fall into that category are routinely the"victims" fault and they dont want to pony up and take responsibility, then some (not all, i know many good lawyers with the best intentions) smell money and run with it like the "i ate McD's all my life now im fat".

what ties this together is the insationable sense of "but its not my fault because _______". this is my generation that seems so unabashed by sheer selfishness that they cannot be at fault because of circumstances out of their hands.

[NEXTEL CUP]

You Guys are missing the point!!! Mcdonalds was ruled neglegent because they served Coffee at such a tempeture that is required under Federal Law to be labled and package in a certain way that would make it safe. The Coffee was not packaged safely and instead was a in a normal Cup, therefore breaking Federal Law. Think of the Hot Coffee like Gasoline. You can only transport Gasoline legally if it in a proper container. Federal law in this case would be OSHA , which proably to the law verbatium from ANSI.

Also at the time of the Mcdonalds Hot Coffee Incident, Mcdonald's had a national media campaign advertising that they served the Hottest Coffee!!!!

[cletus8269]

sure, by all means put hot on the cup, why it wasnt on there is beyond me. up until that point though people understood the coffee was hot. i'm not going to steer the thread off course anymore, im just saying for what its worth most lawsuits that fall into that category are routinely the"victims" fault and they dont want to pony up and take responsibility, then some (not all, i know many good lawyers with the best intentions) smell money and run with it like the "i ate McD's all my life now im fat".

what ties this together is the insationable sense of "but its not my fault because _______". this is my generation that seems so unabashed by sheer selfishness that they cannot be at fault because of circumstances out of their hands.

You Guys are missing the point!!! Mcdonalds was ruled neglegent because they served Coffee at such a tempeture that is required under Federal Law to be labled and package in a certain way that would make it safe. The Coffee was not packaged safely and instead was a in a normal Cup, therefore breaking Federal Law. Think of the Hot Coffee like Gasoline. You can only transport Gasoline legally if it in a proper container. Federal law in this case would be OSHA , which proably to the law verbatium from ANSI.

Also at the time of the Mcdonalds Hot Coffee Incident, Mcdonald's had a national media campaign advertising that they served the Hottest Coffee!!!!

no point was missed, but verbal warning is now pointed out as well

[capriceman]

really the hot coffee issue is not even worth while to talk about when this kid will probably have a sexual offense on him for the rest of his life for somthing that He probably thought was just a good time.

coffee is really petty compared to this youth's entire life.

[cletus8269]

really the hot coffee issue is not even worth while to talk about when this kid will probably have a sexual offense on him for the rest of his life for somthing that He probably thought was just a good time.

coffee is really petty compared to this youth's entire life.

very true. job applications, moving, just about any kind of form filled out. he will be required to announce it. people dont see the situation, they just see the phrase "sex offender" and freak out.

[staceface]

i've got to point out that if you drink to excess and choose to drive, if you kill someone its manslaughter. you are held accountable. why should drinking to excess and having sex not be your fault?

as for the mcdonalds debate, i would suspect this wasn't the customers first trip through the drive thu. Wouldn't her expectations be that the coffee was hot? Would the temperature of McD's coffee be what prompted her to return? How stupid do you have to be to transport coffee between your legs???

[Drew Dowdell]

i've got to point out that if you drink to excess and choose to drive, if you kill someone its manslaughter. you are held accountable. why should drinking to excess and having sex not be your fault?

Who's fault... the girl's or the guy's?

If the girl got drunk and had sex... who's fault is it then?

[staceface]

well both at fault - they both drank, they both had sex, accountability equal... he could just as easily claim he'd been taken advantage of

regret can make people do very dumb things....

however, if the girl got drunk and had sex, whose fault then? hers. i'm not trying to place blame, but rather accountability.

when i think of the restrictions this boy could have impact the rest of his life, this is truly tragic. it's crazy how one night of drunken fun turned around, and life as he knows it could be over. very very sad.

Edited September 16, 2009 by staceface

[capriceman]

well both at fault - they both drank, they both had sex, accountability equal... he could just as easily claim he'd been taken advantage of

See that's rational, courts aren't.

[toesuf94]

well both at fault - they both drank, they both had sex, accountability equal... he could just as easily claim he'd been taken advantage of

regret can make people do very dumb things....

Exactly...but the Boy will be charged and the girl will be able to tell everyone she was raped because she sobered up. BOTH should be held accountable equally - he should charge her with raping him and see if she does not change her story. Let her carry the equal weight of the badge sex offender if she is so charged.

Face it folks - neither of them should have had access to the booze and the place to party for this to have happened. He did not force her to drink - she did not force him to drink either - both acted on their own - so both are equally to blame in my eyes.

If there were indications of Forced sex, or a rufie slipped in a drink, then I would change my tune - but if the boy acted only as a drunken fool - and the girl was equally stupid, then there should be no charge here.

[Lamar]

The best thing about playing with kids is that they dont think ahead. They live for the moment.

Also symptomatic of society.