"Karl E. Jorgensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 07:51:34PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> > Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) wrote:
> > > > "Coffee at 180 degrees" is a distinct item from "coffee". Coffee is
On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 07:51:34PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) wrote:
> > > "Coffee at 180 degrees" is a distinct item from "coffee". Coffee is
> > > not properly served at 180 degrees
> >
> > What are yo
Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) wrote:
> > Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Give me a break. Coffee is hot. It is made with boiling water. This
> > > is not a case of a McDonalds employee spilling coffee on someone else.
> >
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) wrote:
> Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Give me a break. Coffee is hot. It is made with boiling water. This
> > is not a case of a McDonalds employee spilling coffee on someone else.
> > This is someone not being careful and spilling it on
* Walter Landry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030921 02:03]:
> Joe Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Contrary to popular belief, the McDonald's coffee case was not frivolous.
> >
> > http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_mcdonalds.htm
> Give me a break. Coffee is hot. It is made with boilin
Walter Landry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Joe Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Don Armstrong wrote:
> > > 1: Of course, you do hear about rather rediculous [sic] judgements from
> > > time to time. That's because there are quite a few moronic lower court
> > > judges out there. Most of those
Joe Drew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Don Armstrong wrote:
> > 1: Of course, you do hear about rather rediculous [sic] judgements from
> > time to time. That's because there are quite a few moronic lower court
> > judges out there. Most of those settlements (the Mc-D's coffee one for
> > instance)
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003, Andreas Barth wrote:
> In this case she did "swim" in it, see also
> http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm (which describes that case
> IMHO much better).
Thanks for the link. That should remind me to check anectdotes out
slightly more carefully.
Don Armstrong
--
Sentence
* Don Armstrong ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030920 21:50]:
> On Sat, 20 Sep 2003, Joe Drew wrote:
> > Contrary to popular belief, the McDonald's coffee case was not
> > frivolous.
> >
> > http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_mcdonalds.htm
> First off, hot coffee causes 2nd degree burns, not
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> First off, hot coffee causes 2nd degree burns, not 3rd degree
> burns.[1]
Ordinary temperature coffee does indeed cause 2nd degree burns. This
is not true however for coffee served at 180 degrees Farenheit.
> Secondly, the punitive award by the jury o
Whoa. Digging around in the archives are we?
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003, Joe Drew wrote:
> Don Armstrong wrote:
>>1: Of course, you do hear about rather rediculous [sic] judgements
>>from time to time. That's because there are quite a few moronic lower
>>court judges out there. Most of those settlements
11 matches
Mail list logo
