An idiot and his table saw...

[Michael A. Terrell]

[Michael A. Terrell]

Even though the money awarded was reduced, and the case was appealed.

[Attila Iskander]

# # Excuse me, but YOU are the one bitching that we should not # require everyone to have healthcare so that they are covered # in the event of an accident or illness that puts them in the # hospital. #

More ignorant spin and projection But thank you for demonstrating how you did the projection

Rest of stupid shit and repetition ignored

[Attila Iskander]

# # Oh what a pile of total BS. Show us any evidence that # this is true. That the overwhelming percentage of welfare # money is not actually going to recipients. As for the bureaucrats # checking up for fraud, there should be more of them. # When is the last time you saw anyone prosecuted for # welfare fraud?

Another fine demonstration of absence of logic A bunch of bureaucrats pushing paper to "insure lack of fraud" does NOT necessarily and automatically lead to prosecution for welfare fraud. It just guarantees more bureaucrats to push more paper, as has been the case

Meanwhile we have undeniable evidence of the unraveling of the social fabric of inner city residents who also happen to be the least employed and most welfare dependent Just look at the increase of single parent families, women never married with multiple fathers for their brood of kids, crime and gang issues, to name a few.

But hey, naturally, according to you, those are not problems. the act that no one got prosecuted for fraud is far more critical

[Attila Iskander]

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.

[pyotr filipivich]

The Daring Dufas on Sat, 08 Dec

2012 09:40:18 -0600 typed >> The Dar>>>> At her age I think the prospect of future offspring was a moot point

Yep. Although it turns out that he knew and told some of the dirtiest stories - but always backstage, never out front. My Dad caught one of his shows while he was in the service. Half way through his act he told the audience "Sorry, I don't have enough material for two complete shows, so any of you guys who were here for the first show will have seen this next bit before." I think that is when Dad became a real fan.

I love his bit about how to drink coffee and donuts. "You must extend your little finger when you dunk. It's to catch the edge of the cup, otherwise you could go into the cup up to your elbow."

[pyotr filipivich]

"Michael A. Terrell" on Sat, 08 Dec 2012

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

[trader4]

When you have some actual data that shows that today, something is different and the vast majority of welfare payments are not going to those on the programs, but is instead being consumed by bureaucrats, let us know. But as usual, I suspect that won't be forthcoming, will it. Profanity will.

[Attila Iskander]

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.

[Attila Iskander]

When you have some actual data that shows that today, something is different and the vast majority of welfare payments are not going to those on the programs, but is instead being consumed by bureaucrats, let us know. But as usual, I suspect that won't be forthcoming, will it. Profanity will.

More strawman crap. Are you so unable to argue rationally that you constantly need to create strawman arguments ?

Here's some graphical data of the increase of welfare Note how it has increased far more quickly than the population How the ratio of recipients to producers has changed for the worse under Obama

I'll leave it to you to take responsibility to educate yourself further (One can only hope that you will try to get away from your culture of ignorance)

[J. Clarke]

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.

[J. Clarke]

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.

[trader4]

They certainly did. The basic facts:

McDonald=92s 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;

McDonald=92s admitted that it has known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years =97 the risk was brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits, to no avail;

From 1982 to 1992, McDonald=92s 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 McDonald=92s scalding hot coffee, in some instances due to inadvertent spillage by McDonald=92s employees;

McDonald=92s admitted at trial that its coffee is =93not fit for consumption=94 when sold because it causes severe scalds if spilled or drunk;

Liebeck=92s treating physician testified that her injury was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen.

McDonald=92s 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 Shriner=92s 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 McDonald=92s behavior =93callous.=94

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.

[Attila Iskander]

# # They certainly did. The basic facts: # # McDonald?s 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 ?

# #McDonald?s 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

[J. Clarke]

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?

[krw]

Statists aren't known for their logic.

[krw]

story...

> >> >

McD's is at least drinkable (Starbucks is not) but it's stone cold.

But they lie.

+1

[J. Clarke]

story...

>> >> >

Not around here it isn't. If it is where you are talk to the manager and if that doesn't work talk to corporate.

[Robert Green]

No matter which side you fall on in this matter, the summary above makes for very interesting reading.

-- Bobby G.

[krw]

story...

> >> >> >

Why would I do that? Just say "no" to McD's coffee. If they want to make crap they can keep it (and I, my money).