I don't drink coffee, but I've seen the advertisements for Tim
Horton's coffee. I visit one of their stores for lunch three times a
week. Tim Horton's guarantees a new pot of coffee every twenty minutes
if it isn't finished first. Just for the hell of it, I watched during
the lunchtime rush as a new pot of coffee got emptied within six
minutes. I don't know how fast a pot would cool, but I'm reasonably
sure it would still be pretty damned hot that entire six minutes. ~
enough so to burn skin on contact.
I suppose powdered milk could be handy but I'm happy with fresh. I don't
know about Venezuela but fresh milk is not often - even ever - available in
some places. In Mexico, I don't ever recall seeing it, just one liter
cartons of ultrapasturized milk; that too was handy because even though we
had a refrigerator, many people did not and the ultrapastureized does not
need refigeration until opened and one liter is easy to use up quickly.
I would rather take care of myself rather than some bureaucrat in
Washington tell me how to live. Unless the widget was being used as
designed and didn't malfunction (particularly in a previously known
manner), I should be on my own, thank you.
She was trying to add cream & sugar.
For the real story:
"Stella Liebeck's lawsuit was turned into a punch-line as many news
outlets overlooked the critical facts of the case including the nearly
700 other complaints that McDonalds had received about their hot coffee."
"Fact: Stella suffered third-degree burns (the most serious kind of
burns) over her lap, which included large portions of her inner thighs
and other sensitive areas. She was hospitalized for 8 days and endured
several very painful procedures to clean her wounds. She required skin
grafts and suffered serious and permanent scarring."
As to the amount:
"They initially decided to order the restaurant chain to pay her $160,000
in medical expenses and compensatory damages, as well as an additional
$2.7million in punitive damages.
The judge was the one to reduce that amount down to $640,000 before the
final payout was settled out of court.
What wasn't commonly reported was the way in which the jury came up with
the $2.7million figure.
At the time, McDonalds earned roughly $1.33million per day on coffee
sales alone, so the jury felt it was appropriate for them to pay the
equivalent of two day's earnings."
Do note that the final settlement was undisclosed but far less than $1M
from your link,
After their order was completed, her grandson pulled the car forward out
of the drive-through lane and stopped again to allow Stella to add cream
and sugar to her coffee. Stella placed the coffee between her knees so
she could use both hands to open the lid and add her sugar. While
removing the lid the cup tipped over and poured the entire cup of 190
degree coffee all over her sweatpants, which absorbed the hot liquid and
held it against her skin.
Actually the details of these 700 complaints were covered in a more
complete article where many of those 700 complaints mentioned burns that
were received to parts of the body that coffee is not intended to be
From 1982 to 1992, McDonald's coffee burned more than 700 people, many
receiving severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and
This happens pretty often when you pour scalding liquids on yourself.
Try pouring a cup of scalding hot water from you kitchen sink, which is
approximately 35% cooler than a normal cup of coffee onto your crotch.
On 5/17/2014 2:34 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Yeah, it was entered more to prove an emotional response that affects
We think that the lady should have been protected from McDonald's, which
few like, and a few dislike like SawStop which is providing a product
that does protects us.
I suspect that most would believe that the lady got what she deserved
had she first gone to congress to get mandated a low temperature
regulators on all coffee makers before she was burned.
Both the lady being burned with the McDonald's coffee and the guy
cutting his digit off using a Ryobi saw were more at fault than the
provider of the instrument of mass destruction. Yet there seems to be
almost equal opposition against McDonalds and the saw operator.
Emotion is the guiding factor.
Arguably, the "guiding factor" in both cases is actually the "Mother of
all guiding factors":
Threat of (losing) litigation.
Due to litigation, the temperature of coffee served in McDonald's is now
lower, and as a result arguably safer for the drinker overall.
And, the increasing acceptance of SawStop by both corporations and
consumers, while not as mature, is unequivocally due in part to
litigation, as well as being safer overall for an operator.
Both cases where the destination is arguably more important than the
I don't "like" either. I like choice and am actually capable of
figuring out for myself that coffee is hot (or that my table saw can
Not sure I follow that. She deserved? Burns or a megabuck? Even if
she had warned them in a certified letter that coffee was hot, how
would that have changed anything? There is a difference between
"deserved" and "is responsible for".
I think you're 100% right. Both are responsible for damaging
themselves. IMO, no one else is even 1% culpable. ...besides,
*maybe* her son.
Of course but I suppose it's emotional to reject all unnecessary
government intervention in my life, too. I rather like liberty but
also understand you can't have liberty without at least as much
On 5/17/2014 3:28 PM, email@example.com wrote:
I believe that government is good up to a point. Certainly we would
have been invaded with out an army and the fire department seems to be
useful. But for the most part most things, beyond defending our borders
and maintaining our infrastructure, that the government is attempting,
and rather poorly, is a job way way above it's pay grade.
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.