Yeah I realize I just find it funny. They started that because the Mcdonolds lawsuit. A women sued because she spilled hot coffee on herself. They said "You asked for a hot coffee"? She claimed she was not warned. So they were forced to pay these stupid women. If I was judge I would lock her in jail for wasting my time. If people are rewarded for being this way they will never learn.
While I do agree that this case was extreme and shows just how sue happy people in this country can be, it wasn't the lack of a warning that she complained about, it was the temperature of the coffee itself. She sustained 3rd degree burns because of a spillage and spent a couple weeks in the hospital. Granted the spill was her fault, however the coffee had no business being that hot in the first place.
It was a rather stupid situation but the lawyers agreed to take the case. They are just as much to blame.
Coffee is still hot. Regardless and that is like complaining your fries are fresh. Why you are suppose to wait a few minutes to cool. I have spilled drinks and such before right after leaving. They were always nice enough to ask if I wanted another cup. I never would sue them over something like this though. They should not have paid for it. Also can a court choose to deny a case?
You overlooked my point. It wasn't the fact that the coffee was hot, it was near boiling. Too hot for reasonable consumption. This is why she won and this is why it actually made it to trial. If your fries came to you burnt, you would probably complain. If your fries caused you a 2 week stay in the hospital, you might be a little annoyed. It is more comparable getting salmonella poisoning as this wasn't just a bad day.
Like I said, I believe it was stupid case. But you should understand the facts of the case before belittling the woman.
Is it normal I find disclaimers ironic?
← View full post
It's to prevent lawsuits.
But I saw the best disclaimer on a cup today. It read "Warning, if you put hot contents in this cup, the cup will become hot."
You can't prevent stupidity, but you can cover your ass.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
Yeah I realize I just find it funny. They started that because the Mcdonolds lawsuit. A women sued because she spilled hot coffee on herself. They said "You asked for a hot coffee"? She claimed she was not warned. So they were forced to pay these stupid women. If I was judge I would lock her in jail for wasting my time. If people are rewarded for being this way they will never learn.
--
howaminotmyself
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
While I do agree that this case was extreme and shows just how sue happy people in this country can be, it wasn't the lack of a warning that she complained about, it was the temperature of the coffee itself. She sustained 3rd degree burns because of a spillage and spent a couple weeks in the hospital. Granted the spill was her fault, however the coffee had no business being that hot in the first place.
It was a rather stupid situation but the lawyers agreed to take the case. They are just as much to blame.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Coffee is still hot. Regardless and that is like complaining your fries are fresh. Why you are suppose to wait a few minutes to cool. I have spilled drinks and such before right after leaving. They were always nice enough to ask if I wanted another cup. I never would sue them over something like this though. They should not have paid for it. Also can a court choose to deny a case?
--
howaminotmyself
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
You overlooked my point. It wasn't the fact that the coffee was hot, it was near boiling. Too hot for reasonable consumption. This is why she won and this is why it actually made it to trial. If your fries came to you burnt, you would probably complain. If your fries caused you a 2 week stay in the hospital, you might be a little annoyed. It is more comparable getting salmonella poisoning as this wasn't just a bad day.
Like I said, I believe it was stupid case. But you should understand the facts of the case before belittling the woman.
--
Anonymous Post Author
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I realize that but I still do not think this is worth going to court over.
--
howaminotmyself
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
I don't either. But I am willing to hear both sides before condemning the women.