Maybe it's a figment of my imagination.....but I'm sure I read it somewhere.
On 3/22/2021 12:50 PM, Mathew Howard wrote:
I'm having a hard time believing their lawyers actually made that
argument, since I don't see anything on the internet about it, and if
that actually happened, it should be in every article about the
incident. It is true that she initially only wanted $20k to cover
medical expenses, but that all changed as soon as she got lawyers
involved.
But why doesn't anybody question why it is that McDonald's keeps
serving coffee that hot? My guess is that they get a lot of complaints
if they lower the temperature... which means that, although it may not
be fit for consumption that way, it most likely is what their
customers want/demand.
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 7:34 AM Adam Moffett <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
<hijacking>
On 3/22/2021 12:48 AM, Steve Jones wrote:
> Some dumb broad sued McDonald's successfully for dumping hot
coffee on
> her crotch
This case is misrepresented all the time. The coffee was over 180
degrees and caused 2nd degree burns on her privates. She only
sued for
$7,000 for her medical bills, and the argument was the coffee was
intended to be consumed and nobody could ever consume it at that
temperature. McDonald's lawyers actually made an argument that they
shouldn't have to pay for medical care for her lady bits because
she was
old (50 something) and therefore didn't need them anymore. The jury
awarded punitive damages (which the woman never asked for) because
they
found McDonald's argument so offensive.
Imagine your scalded and blistered member and then tell me the coffee
wasn't abnormally and unreasonably too hot. Then imagine someone
saying
"That's fine, Steve doesn't need a schlong anymore cuz he's over 40".
There's another story that's often repeated about a burglar suing a
homeowner after getting injured falling through a skylight. That
never
happened. It was nothing but a rhetorical story made up by a
politician
pushing for tort reform. I think we could benefit from tort
reform, but
I'm just saying that particular story is not evidence of the need
because it literally never happened.
Neither is the McDonald's coffee story. That DID happen, but it
didn't
go down the way people portray it.
--
AF mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
<http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
