An idiot and his table saw...

Page 8 of 9  
In article < snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-

Yeah, we all know the story. A stupid old bat spilled hot coffee in her lap and looked for somebody other than herself to blame.
If she had cranked up an oxyacetylene torch and applied it to herself would the maker of the torch be at fault? If she had stuck her finger in a light socket would the power company be at fault?
She was stupid, she got punished for it, and the courts should have told her to sod off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Apparently you don't, you just think you do. The jury knows the story. And that story, in sum, is not that the woman refused to accept responsibility for her actions, but that McD's refused to accept responsibility for theirs.
Now, you want to throw out the jury system, you're gonna have to go bigger than usenet.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I agree with you on this one. I think a lot of the people just jump to the conclusion with very little of the facts. I looked into it a bit and here are some of the facts:
McDonalds Operations Manual required the franchisee to hold its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit;
Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the worst kind of burn) in three to seven seconds;
Third-degree burns do not heal without skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability of the victim for many months, and in some cases, years;
She received third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, necessitating hospitalization for eight days, whirlpool treatment for debridement of her wounds, skin grafting, scarring, and disability for more than two years.
The chairman of the department of mechanical engineering and bio- mechanical engineering at the University of Texas testified that this risk of harm is unacceptable, as did a widely recognized expert on burns, the editor in chief of the leading scholarly publication in the specialty, the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation;
McDonalds admitted that it has known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years the risk was brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits, to no avail;
From 1982 to 1992, McDonalds coffee burned more than 700 people, many receiving severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and buttocks;
McDonalds admitted at trial that its coffee is not fit for consumption when sold because it causes severe scalds if spilled or drunk;
Liebecks treating physician testified that her injury was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen. McDonalds did a survey of other coffee establishments in the area, and found that coffee at other places was between 30-40 degrees cooler.
In my world, the jury decision was fully justified and the right one. Arguing that it was her fault because she spilled it on herself doesn't absolve McDonalds. McDonalds knows perfectly well what customers who purchase their products at a drive-through do with them. A large percentage of the customers will be opening the container in a car, shortly after receiving it. They knew other people had been burned. It would have been very easy for them to simply serve the coffee at a lower temperature. Even if you buy the argument that the woman bears responsibility, at most it's just some of the responsibility. Maybe 20% her fault, I could see that kind of verdict too. But not one that absolves McD for most of what happened.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
" snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net" wrote:

Even though the money awarded was reduced, and the case was appealed.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
11:22:23 -0500 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

    The problem with suing a company with an in house Legal Firm and also keeps Legal Firms on retainer. Their pockets are deeper than yours.
tschus pyotr
--
pyotr
Go not to the Net for answers, for it will tell you Yes and no. And
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Not a big issue in the States where anyone can start a lawsuit for just about any trivial reason with very little downside risk except for the filing costs
If the US brought in a system like in Canada, where the loser pays, it would reduce some of the really stupid lawsuits It it also required judges to review a case BEFORE it went to jury, that would also eliminate many flawed cases that rely on jury ignorance or sympathy instead of good law.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
says...

I'd like to see a system where the suit _must_ go to trial once brought. The current system is profitable for the plaintiffs because on an individual basis it is cheaper to settle than to go to court, even if the case is winnable.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

LOL They were responsible for selling her a cup of hot coffee Apparently selling a cup of hot coffee to an idiot is a crime for which they were punished

There are some aspects of the jury system which are flawed in the US. In particular the notion that juries, have not demonstrated a "let's stick it to the corporation since they have money" syndrome.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article < snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-

So there's more to the story than was in the trial transcript?

So?
McD had committed no action for which they should "accept responsibility".

Throwing out the jury system is not the solution. Throwing out the ability of the lawyers to ensure that nobody with a brain ever sits on a jury is the solution.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They certainly did. The basic facts:
McDonalds Operations Manual required the franchisee to hold its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit;
Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the worst kind of burn) in three to seven seconds;
The chairman of the department of mechanical engineering and bio- mechanical engineering at the University of Texas testified that this risk of harm is unacceptable, as did a widely recognized expert on burns, the editor in chief of the leading scholarly publication in the specialty, the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation;
McDonalds admitted that it has known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years the risk was brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits, to no avail;
From 1982 to 1992, McDonalds coffee burned more than 700 people, many receiving severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and buttocks;
Not only men and women, but also children and infants, have been burned by McDonalds scalding hot coffee, in some instances due to inadvertent spillage by McDonalds employees;
McDonalds admitted at trial that its coffee is not fit for consumption when sold because it causes severe scalds if spilled or drunk;
Liebecks treating physician testified that her injury was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen.
McDonalds did a survey of other coffee establishments in the area, and found that coffee at other places was between 30-40 degrees cooler.
Moreover, the Shriners Burn Institute in Cincinnati had published warnings to the franchise food industry that its members were unnecessarily causing serious scald burns by serving beverages above 130 degrees Fahrenheit. In refusing to grant a new trial in the case, Judge Robert Scott called McDonalds behavior callous.
Pretty damning. The part where McD admitted that the coffee was not fit for consumption as served because it was so hot, is particularly interesting. As is that their coffee was 30 - 40 deg hotter than similar establishments in the area, and that was by their own survey.

I've been on juries, gone through the selection process. People get tossed for a wide variety of reasons. And the resulting jury appeared in every way as educated as the starting pool.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

# They certainly did. The basic facts: # # McDonalds Operations Manual required the franchisee to hold its # coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit; # # Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the # worst kind of burn) in three to seven seconds;
Yes but normal sane people do not go around putting cups of hot coffee between their legs in a car There is no reason for Macdonals to be responsible for THAT STUPID ACTION (Except in the minds of children - who are not responsible)
# # The chairman of the department of mechanical engineering and bio- # mechanical engineering at the University of Texas testified that this # risk of harm is unacceptable, as did a widely recognized expert on # burns, the editor in chief of the leading scholarly publication in the # specialty, the Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation;
And who defined the Chairman of the Dept of Mech Eng. at the U of Texas as an arbiter of what is acceptable or unacceptable harm ?
# #McDonalds admitted that it has known about the risk of serious burns # from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years the risk was # brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits, to # no avail;
And ?
Repeating yourself like a parrot just makes you a parrot
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
says...

Their manual is in accordance with the ANSI standard for coffee brewing and with the standards of the Specialty Coffee Association of America. The simple fact is that certain kinds of food are hot enough to harm you.

And when did he become an expert on coffee?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The jury heard ALL the evidence. Including McDonalds own survey that showed it's competitors were serving coffee that is 30 -40 deg cooler. And McD own admission at trial that the coffee, as served was unfit for human consumption. The jury decided. You and McD lost. Live with it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:17:02 -0800 (PST), " snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net"

You're claiming that juries always come to the correct conclusion? Amazing!
"...were serving coffee that is 30 -40 deg cooler." False. At that time Dunkin' Donuts was serving coffee at 180F +/- 3F.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Hopefully, just the block and the blade. The entire machine is going to need a checking over, since whatever force isn't dissipated by crushing the block is going to absorbed by the parts it attaches to. Looks like the whole saw jumps in that demo.
OTOH, $20,000 for an ER visit will buy you one hell of a nice saw.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/4/12 12:54 PM, Existential Angst wrote:

Good luck trying to dado with that.
--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 19:23:30 -0500, tiredofspam <nospam.nospam.com>

Actually, the people complaining the most about the SawStop are those who hate Gass' attempt to have it mandated. The really sad part about that is because of their anger, it will likely prevent them from ever purchasing a SawStop and put them at risk of cutting a finger off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
====> On 12/5/2012 1:25 AM, Existential Angst wrote: <===

Easy to determine whom he replied to. It's the poster at the top of his message without any ">" in front of it.
And, it would greatly help your request to snip unwanted text if you did what you're asking Leon to do.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Don't believe you. I think you didn't snip any of the thread just to irritate him. :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 12/5/2012 9:05 AM, Dave wrote:

;!)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.