NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/04/costly.cookies.ap/index.html

Basically, a couple of teenage girls wanted to surprise a neighbor with home-baked cookies, and end up nearly inadvertently scaring the life out of her. The neighbor, of course, sues them.

What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!

What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!

Money?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/04/costly.cookies.ap/index.html

Basically, a couple of teenage girls wanted to surprise a neighbor with home-baked cookies, and end up nearly inadvertently scaring the life out of her. The neighbor, of course, sues them.

What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!

Greed and a system that lets them.

I thought the funniest part was she won though.... Now i konw i can sue anyone for coming to my door step for "scarying me to where i'm still shaking i the morning and must go to the hospital."

Basically, a couple of teenage girls wanted to surprise a neighbor with home-baked cookies, and end up nearly inadvertently scaring the life out of her. The neighbor, of course, sues them.


Well ... those girls shouldn't have been wearing the demon masks and been covered in pig blood.

Well ... those girls shouldn't have been wearing the demon masks and been covered in pig blood.
Yeah that would have helped.

Heh, maybe they were evil cookies of DOOM!

Seriously, though, what kind of person would sue for something like that, and what kind of judge would rule in their favor?!

Heh, maybe they were evil cookies of DOOM!

Well i'm going to sue them too! I patented those! :p

Well, if they were giving her money then she wouldn't be suing since everyone would be laughing at her for being an idiot.

Seriously, though, what kind of person would sue for something like that, and what kind of judge would rule in their favor?!

I know a lot of Judges that would... Which is why they're lucky im not a judge i'd find in favor of the girls and order the lady to pay them legal fees for the hell of it..... But i don't really want to go to law school so stupid lawsuits are safe.

If I was an old lady and someone was banging on my door at 10:30 at night and then ran off leaving a package on my doorstep I'd shit myself too.

But the difference between me and this twat of an American who genuinely is one of the people that gives Americans a bad name is that I'd immediately call a neighbor or possibly the local police station, and get someone to come check things out. I would not sit and fret 'til i made myself ill and I certainly wouldn't sue someone.

What the girls did was a nice gesture done with poor judgement (do it at 6:00pm, 'tards) but what this woman has done is not only an abuse of the legal system that the nation seems to think is it's personal battleground, but just in completely poor taste.

If I lived in the neighbourhood she'd be experiencing large quantities of dogshit in her yard, I know that much.

From the article:
"The victory wasn't sweet," Young said. "I'm not gloating about it. I just hope the girls learned a lesson."
Yeah, I guess they've learnt that you shouldn't do anything nice for anyone, and that you can force money out of anyone (especially children) if you make up some crap story about being 'scared'.

What I don't understand is:
1. Why didn't she phone the police if she thought there was an intruder on her property?
2. Why the hell did she go outside to get into her car to go to her sister's house if she was frightened that someone was outside with sinister intent?
3. Why didn't she notice the cookies on her doorstep when she went outside?

I wanted to be a lawyer when I was little.

Nah! Put Hash cookies in her lawyer's car.

What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!

Lawyers. :mad:

About as stupid as the woman who sued McDonalds because she put the drivethrough coffee between her legs drove off and spilled it, causing burns. She sued because they didn't tell her the coffee was hot. I guess she ordered ice coffee.

i didn't realize it could get any stupider than suing because your coffee is too hot. clearly i was wrong. wow. i can't believe she won! i wonder what the judge was drawing on when the ruling was made? see this is why people don't trust thier neighbors anymore. americans must all be scared about getting sued all the time for anything. how can you run a business or even your life if people can successfully sue you for things as stupid as that? i know americans run businesses all the time, but think of how muxh money could be made if they weren't getting sued all the time. hmmm.

Heh, maybe they were evil cookies of DOOM!

Seriously, though, what kind of person would sue for something like that, and what kind of judge would rule in their favor?!

If I understand the article correctly then the judge didn't rule in the plaintif's favor. He "Declined to award punative damages." The jury, which consists of 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty, were persuaded to find the defendants liable for $900, but the job of a responsible judge is to declare a stupid descision unwarranted.

The system is stacked in favor of the defendant because human nature is designed in favor of the plaintif.

Card manufacturers and sellers have to take out big insurance thingys incase someone gets a paper cut and sues. All of this sucks, I wish that the judges would just dismiss these cases! :mad:

yeah in this case the jduge should have told the old ornery bitch to blow it out her ear. the girls parents offered to pay for her medical expenses

Only in America. :rolleyes:

[url]
What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!

Americans don't understand that those stupid little law suits are cost them as well. They want everything handed to them on a silver platter that they don't notice that servant is the bill collector. One of these days people need to realize that if you're so panicky then go someplace remote without a neighbor for miles. That way you can shoot an intruder and not get in trouble for it.

Americans are just waiting to have their country conquered just so their pride will be dented and then they will realize that not everything is about them.

About as stupid as the woman who sued McDonalds because she put the drivethrough coffee between her legs drove off and spilled it, causing burns. She sued because they didn't tell her the coffee was hot. I guess she ordered ice coffee.


You are misinformed. She did NOT put it between her legs and drive off, and McDonalds was sued because they had REPEATEDLY been involved in scald incidents.

http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_mcdonalds.htm

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/04/costly.cookies.ap/index.html

Basically, a couple of teenage girls wanted to surprise a neighbor with home-baked cookies, and end up nearly inadvertently scaring the life out of her. The neighbor, of course, sues them.

What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!

Oh brother! Another two plus lawyers getting rich or richer. Frankly, I think these types of cases ought to be banned.

Seriously, though, what kind of person would sue for something like that, and what kind of judge would rule in their favor?!

Notice that the girls only have to pay medical fees - which they had previously offered to pay anyways.

The judge refused to award any other damages - the woman wanted quite a bit of "pain and suffering" money as well.

About as stupid as the woman who sued McDonalds because she put the drivethrough coffee between her legs drove off and spilled it, causing burns. She sued because they didn't tell her the coffee was hot. I guess she ordered ice coffee.

Way to make up a bunch of BS.

The woman was not driving, was in a PARKED car. When she opened it, it was hot enough to spill out on its own.

Meanwhile, the coffee was so hot that it was able to cause third degree burns over a significant portion of her body in about 7 seconds.

McDonald's knew that their coffee was too hot, had already received warnings and several complaints, and did nothing about it.

On top of that, the woman originally asked only for medical bills and was denied.

It must really suck to be a Girl Scout in that area.

What an incredible bitch. I bet she made some livelong friends. Or maybe she'll sue again if they refuse to ever speak to her again.

From the article:

Yeah, I guess they've learnt that you shouldn't do anything nice for anyone.
No good dead goes unpunished.

Way to make up a bunch of BS.

The woman was not driving, was in a PARKED car. When she opened it, it was hot enough to spill out on its own.

Meanwhile, the coffee was so hot that it was able to cause third degree burns over a significant portion of her body in about 7 seconds.

McDonald's knew that their coffee was too hot, had already received warnings and several complaints, and did nothing about it.

On top of that, the woman originally asked only for medical bills and was denied.

They have on the coffee cups:

Caution: Contents maybe HOT!!!!

Anyone that sues over hot coffee when THAT is on the cups is a moron!

Anyone that sues over hot coffee when THAT is on the cups is a moron!

Shhhhhhh...they'll sue you for slander if they hear.

They have on the coffee cups:

Caution: Contents maybe HOT!!!!

Anyone that sues over hot coffee when THAT is on the cups is a moron!

You do understand the difference between "hot" as in, hot as most hot drinks, and "hot" as in "will cause third-degree burns", correct?

This is like saying that putting up a sign that says "loud noises" means that no one can sue me if I allow them to walk in without suggesting earplugs and the noise is so loud that it blows their eardrums out. Most loud noises are not so loud that they will cause permanent physical harm.

You do understand the difference between "hot" as in, hot as most hot drinks, and "hot" as in "will cause third-degree burns", correct?

This is like saying that putting up a sign that says "loud noises" means that no one can sue me if I allow them to walk in without suggesting earplugs and the noise is so loud that it blows their eardrums out. Most loud noises are not so loud that they will cause permanent physical harm.
1) the caution was added after the burn moron stop furthering the lie, and yes, saying caution: hot, will protect you from lawsutis if some one gets burned

They have on the coffee cups:

Caution: Contents maybe HOT!!!!

Anyone that sues over hot coffee when THAT is on the cups is a moron!

They started placing those warnings on their cups as a result of that case. Same with the way they changed the lid so that you could hold the cup of coffee by the lid without the lid coming off.

If you bothered reading any of the articles people posted about it, you'd know that McDonalds had kept their coffee 50 degrees hotter than was deemed safe.

Shhhhhhh...they'll sue you for slander if they hear.

1st Amendment Rights!

Serves those girls right. Frankly why they wanted to leave a nice surprise for someone like that is beyond me, and I seriously doubt their supposed motives, especially in not answering. They probably thought she was a cantankerous old bitch and purposedly made the cookies to spite her. And did anyone check if the cookies were poisoned? I bet they didn't. Maybe some slow-acting poison or ground up glass. No one would suspect two little girls. But I know the truth!

1) the caution was added after the burn moron stop furthering the lie, and yes, saying caution: hot, will protect you from lawsutis if some one gets burned

Not if the "hot" you refer to is much hotter than anyone could reasonably expect.

Again, if I place a sign that says "loud noises", then calmly lead someone in without earplugs and their earrdrums get blow out, would you say that they are not allowed to sue?

Does "loud noises" prepare you for "SO FUCKING LOUD IT BLOWS YOUR EARDRUMS OUT AND MAKES YOU GO INSTANTLY DEAF!!"?

Of course not. Any reasonable person would think that "loud noises" meant loud noises, probably no worse than any factory or rock concert. As such, without putting a further warning to protect myself, I could get sued.

They started placing those warnings on their cups as a result of that case. Same with the way they changed the lid so that you could hold the cup of coffee by the lid without the lid coming off.

If you bothered reading any of the articles people posted about it, you'd know that McDonalds had kept their coffee 50 degrees hotter than was deemed safe.

Dude, I can get a third degree burn from spilling home hot coffee on me! Should I sue the coffee pot maker or the Coffee cup maker for this? My mother received a 2nd degree burn from a cup of coffee the spilled onto her hand at a friend's house! Granted, I accidentally caused this but it was a 2nd degree burn, nothing less.

Anyone who has coffee knows that it is extremely hot and if you spill it on you, are more than likely to get burned.

Dude, I can get a third degree burn from spilling home hot coffee on me! Should I sue the coffee pot maker or the Coffee cup maker for this? My mother received a 2nd degree burn from a cup of coffee the spilled onto her hand at a friend's house! Granted, I accidentally caused this but it was a 2nd degree burn, nothing less.

Anyone who has coffee knows that it is extremely hot and if you spill it on you, are more than likely to get burned.

Do you know the difference between a 2nd degree burn and a 3rd degree burn? For your education: Burn types (http://www.burn-victim-center.com/types.html)

Coffee made in normal coffee makers, like the ones found in your house, normally keep coffee around 130 to 140 degrees Fahrenheit. McDonalds kept their coffee 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit. They did so knowing the severe damage that coffee at that temperature could cause 3rd degree burns, and they kept coffee at that temperature even through over 700 suits over 3rd degree burns caused by their coffee, a majority in the genital area, and a significant portion caused by McDonalds employees. This isn't just some case of a sue-happy woman dumping coffee on her lap to get some cash.

Not if the "hot" you refer to is much hotter than anyone could reasonably expect.

Again, if I place a sign that says "loud noises", then calmly lead someone in without earplugs and their earrdrums get blow out, would you say that they are not allowed to sue?

Does "loud noises" prepare you for "SO FUCKING LOUD IT BLOWS YOUR EARDRUMS OUT AND MAKES YOU GO INSTANTLY DEAF!!"?

Of course not. Any reasonable person would think that "loud noises" meant loud noises, probably no worse than any factory or rock concert. As such, without putting a further warning to protect myself, I could get sued.
if they go in without earplugs, thats their own fault, if you lead them in without them, thats your fault. stop being a dumb ass. and last i checked, the smart people do wear ear plugs at rock concerts: the band

About as stupid as the woman who sued McDonalds because she put the drivethrough coffee between her legs drove off and spilled it, causing burns. She sued because they didn't tell her the coffee was hot. I guess she ordered ice coffee.
The coffee was over 200 degrees farenheit. Had she tried to drink it, she would have burned her throat. If there is no safe way to use your product, your product is bad.

if they go in without earplugs, thats their own fault, if you lead them in without them, thats your fault. stop being a dumb ass

How about we don't flame people, eh?

Dude, I can get a third degree burn from spilling home hot coffee on me! Should I sue the coffee pot maker or the Coffee cup maker for this? My mother received a 2nd degree burn from a cup of coffee the spilled onto her hand at a friend's house! Granted, I accidentally caused this but it was a 2nd degree burn, nothing less.

Anyone who has coffee knows that it is extremely hot and if you spill it on you, are more than likely to get burned.

Wrong. You cannot get a third degree burn from spilling coffee brewed at home, which is 50 degrees cooler than the coffee McDonald's was serving. This is *normal* coffee. McDonald's was serving *abnormal* coffee. Do you see the difference?

if they go in without earplugs, thats their own fault, if you lead them in without them, thats your fault. stop being a dumb ass
You have no concept of liability or the legal system at ALL. The law is based around "reasonableness." If I order coffee, I assume it's safe to drink. Any REASONABLE person would assume that if you order a beverage, it's safe to drink. Any reasonable person assumes that if sit in a chair, it won't fall apart and impale you. Maybe there is a warning on your chair that says "caution: sitting on this chair may result in painful death," but it's UNREASONABLE to expect people to sit in a chair that causes death. Same thing with loud noises. A reasonable person assumes that loud noises means rock concert, restaurant, or airline engines. No reasonable person associates "loud noises" with having their eardrums explode and blood oozing from their ears.

if they go in without earplugs, thats their own fault, if you lead them in without them, thats your fault. stop being a dumb ass. and last i checked, the smart people do wear ear plugs at rock concerts: the band

No, I had a sign.

According to what you just said, McDonald's should have had to tell the woman "You need to wait thirty minutes to drink this coffee, or it will cause burns" in order to keep from getting sued.

Wrong. You cannot get a third degree burn from spilling coffee brewed at home, which is 50 degrees cooler than the coffee McDonald's was serving. This is *normal* coffee. McDonald's was serving *abnormal* coffee. Do you see the difference?
actually, if you were at home, and spilled your just brewed hot cofee on you while wearing something like sweatpants or anything not quickly removable from the skin you WOULD get a third degree burn

Dude, I can get a third degree burn from spilling home hot coffee on me! Should I sue the coffee pot maker or the Coffee cup maker for this? My mother received a 2nd degree burn from a cup of coffee the spilled onto her hand at a friend's house! Granted, I accidentally caused this but it was a 2nd degree burn, nothing less.

Anyone who has coffee knows that it is extremely hot and if you spill it on you, are more than likely to get burned.

There's a difference. You have no control over how hot McDonalds serves their coffee. You have control over how hot your own is. I suppose you could have stuck you finger in it to see if it was hot, but then you'd burn yourself wouldn't you?

actually, if you were at home, and spilled your just brewed hot cofee on you while wearing something like sweatpants or anything not quickly removable from the skin you WOULD get a third degree burn

My coffee comes out at about 130 degrees. This is enough to give a first degree burn. I don't know what YOU'RE doing, but it's way hotter then it has to be.

actually, if you were at home, and spilled your just brewed hot cofee on you while wearing something like sweatpants or anything not quickly removable from the skin you WOULD get a third degree burn
Do you have any idea what a third degree burn is? It's permanent neurological damage. It's one step away from the BONE being charred. You don't get a third degree burn from anything less than something a few dozen degrees above boiling water or fire.

The entire idea is off. If somebody can simply print a basic concept onto a surface and be void of all legal responsibility, we are all doomed. If that is a defense, then wearing a shirt that says "Caution: Wearer may kill and maim you and your family and rob you blind", should void me of responsibility for the idiots who did not protect themselves from my attacks.

......your joking right?

God damn, stupid americans.

Do you have any idea what a third degree burn is? It's permanent neurological damage. It's one step away from the BONE being charred. You don't get a third degree burn from anything less than something a few dozen degrees above boiling water or fire.
you want me to reference you what i was just reading? i'll do it. now shut the fuck up and sit the fuck down

Do you have any idea what a third degree burn is? It's permanent neurological damage. It's one step away from the BONE being charred. You don't get a third degree burn from anything less than something a few dozen degrees above boiling water or fire.
Yeah, I was gonna say, I've spilled coffee down my shirt before, and although it hurt like a bitch for a while, it was really just a bad scald rather than a burn.

The entire idea is off. If somebody can simply print a basic concept onto a surface and be void of all legal responsibility, we are all doomed. If that is a defense, then wearing a shirt that says "Caution: Wearer may kill and maim you and your family and rob you blind", should void me of responsibility for the idiots who did not protect themselves from my attacks.
unless you have that tatooed somewhere visible, its just a shirt. and if you have it tatooed somewhere visible you will probably get jailed

you want me to reference you what i was just reading? i'll do it. now shut the fuck up and sit the fuck down
That was a little uncalled for, s/he was merely pointing something out to you.

you want me to reference you what i was just reading? i'll do it. now shut the fuck up and sit the fuck down

I want you to post it right here.

That was a little uncalled for, s/he was merely pointing something out to you.
if they are going to be an ass, i'll play their silly little "i'm somehow inherently smarter than you game thus i can say whatever i want" game

http://www.cqc.state.ny.us/newsletter/estime.htm

except i actually look up shit like that before i speak

you want me to reference you what i was just reading? i'll do it. now shut the fuck up and sit the fuck down

I found the idea of threatening someone with showing them a source of information hilarious.

I'd love to see it.

if they are going to be an ass, i'll play their silly little "i'm somehow inherently smarter than you game thus i can say whatever i want" game

http://www.cqc.state.ny.us/newsletter/estime.htm

except i actually look up shit like that before i speak

So, by your "evidence", the coffee heated at the normal temperature would have to sit on the skin, without cooling down, for 35 seconds to cause a third-degree burn. By contrast, your "evidence" does not even include how long it would take for McDonalds coffee to cause a third degree burn. But, as it would take 1 second at 160 degrees, we can assume that it would take even less time at the 180-190 degrees that McDonalds used to serve their coffee at.

if they are going to be an ass, i'll play their silly little "i'm somehow inherently smarter than you game thus i can say whatever i want" game

http://www.cqc.state.ny.us/newsletter/estime.htm

except i actually look up shit like that before i speak

Bwahahaha, they're assuming the skin is in contact with a source that keeps a constant temperature. Coffee won't concentrate in one spot, it'll drip off you. Plus it'll cool down at a rapid rate once it touches you.

Notice that the article (http://www.cqc.state.ny.us/could_this_happen/case13.htm) that the information was pertaining to was about an elderly woman in a shower.

So, by your "evidence", the coffee heated at the normal temperature would have to sit on the skin, without cooling down, for 35 seconds to cause a third-degree burn. By contrast, your "evidence" does not even include how long it would take for McDonalds coffee to cause a third degree burn. But, as it would take 1 second at 160 degrees, we can assume that it would take even less time at the 180-190 degrees that McDonalds used to serve their coffee at.
no shit, you figure that all out by yourself sherlock? yes at higher than 160 degrees it CAN be assumed it would take 1 second or less

and on the elderly it can probably be given the same time frame as that of a child

God I love this country. Where else can people lacking the basic concepts of common sense florish so well? In what other country would one completely insult their own homeland and claim its greatness in one breath? None. That is why America is great. The people living there on the other hand.....

But I digress.

We rule.

I rule.

Sketch owns you all.

Bwahahaha, they're assuming the skin is in contact with a source that keeps a constant temperature. Coffee won't concentrate in one spot, it'll drip off you. Plus it'll cool down at a rapid rate once it touches you.

Notice that the article (http://www.cqc.state.ny.us/could_this_happen/case13.htm) that the information was pertaining to was about an elderly woman in a shower.
ive seen the same stats listed when referencing the mcdonalds case.

ive seen the same stats listed when referencing the mcdonalds case.

By who? A legal team in the case or some misinformed guy writing some aritcle?

By who? A legal team in the case or some misinformed guy writing some aritcle?
i dont remember

WTF happened to "Caveat Emptor"...

Let the buyer beware?

When are we going to take the initiative in this country and tell the ignorant bastards who got burned from sticking hot coffee in a paper cup in their freakin' laps and driving that that was a stupid fucking move and be done with it?

Why don't we say to the fat bastards suing Mc Dickheads because it turned them into fat, slothlike tubs of shit, that maybe if they got off their great giant ass and took a walk, maybe ate a carrot or two and stayed away from what is commonly known as unhealthy food, perhaps they woulnd't be so lonely and depressed they feel they have to bog down an already overloaded court system with their fat assed problems.

And about this lady and her cookies...

Thank you for teaching children all over the country to help out a neighbor, you know, make some friends. All it'll get you is financial hardship.

You know what? This whole story has caused me undue distress and mental anguish. Excuse me I need to call an ambulance chaser.

:finger:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/04/costly.cookies.ap/index.html

Basically, a couple of teenage girls wanted to surprise a neighbor with home-baked cookies, and end up nearly inadvertently scaring the life out of her. The neighbor, of course, sues them.

What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!

"The rule of law," and the hope of financial gain ( read: greed ).

Can you say "frivilous lawsuit" boys and girls?

i dont remember

Oh well, doesn't matter too much. I can't be 100% sure if the information can be applied to this situation, but I'm fairly sure it can't.

WTF happened to "Caveat Emptor"...

Let the buyer beware?

It died with an increase in the scope of human consumption. This is why we have Consumer Reports. I need someone to beware for me. I'm too busy to be bothered with it.

It died with an increase in the scope of human consumption. This is why we have Consumer Reports. I need someone to beware for me. I'm too busy to be bothered with it.
there is a difference between corporate deception and stupid people

Oh well, doesn't matter too much. I can't be 100% sure if the information can be applied to this situation, but I'm fairly sure it can't.

Actually, it can.

In the case of normal coffee, one would have to have the coffee sit on the skin, without cooling, for 35 seconds in order to be burnt. This would not happen, and is thus besides the point.

In the case of the McDonald's coffee, third degree burns can be caused in 1-3 seconds, even with cooling taken into account. People cannot remove spilled coffee completely off of them in that time period.

no shit, you figure that all out by yourself sherlock? yes at higher than 160 degrees it CAN be assumed it would take 1 second or less

and on the elderly it can probably be given the same time frame as that of a child
So you just admitted that McDonald's coffee is inherently unsafe?

So you just admitted that McDonald's coffee is inherently unsafe?
i admitted 180 is above a 160 and is inversely proportional to the time it takes to cause a burn

They have on the coffee cups:

Caution: Contents maybe HOT!!!!

Anyone that sues over hot coffee when THAT is on the cups is a moron!

That was imprinted on the cups AS A RESULT of this suit.

i admitted 180 is above a 160 and is inversely proportional to the time it takes to cause a burn

In other words, the McDonald's coffee would cause a burn more than 35 times quicker than normal coffee.

In other words, the McDonald's coffee would cause a burn more than 35 times quicker than normal coffee.
did cause, tehy dropped the temperature you nuisance. get the fuck off it. you all need to get a life especially dempublicents and arammanar

Wow. The girls even offered to pay they lady's bills and she turned them down. Sounds like a grumpy old woman who needs a dose of reality. Unfortunately the ruling didn't give that to her, but at least no punitive damages were awarded.

Wow. The girls even offered to pay they lady's bills and she turned them down. Sounds like a grumpy old woman who needs a dose of reality. Unfortunately the ruling didn't give that to her, but at least no punitive damages were awarded.
i wouldve given her a dollar and told her to call some one who cares

did cause, tehy dropped the temperature you nuisance. get the fuck off it. you all need to get a life especially dempublicents and arammanar

Really? Why drop the temperature if they weren't doing anything wrong in the first place?

did cause, tehy dropped the temperature you nuisance. get the fuck off it. you all need to get a life especially dempublicents and arammanar
Really, isn't flaming in a thread in which a moderator just posted a fairly bad idea?

Really? Why drop the temperature if they weren't doing anything wrong in the first place?
hey why dont you get a grip on reality, its over done with, GROW THE FUCK UP, im nto disputing anything, you are trying to argue with me on a nonexistant matter, go have a long, engaging conversation with a wall

Ok. Onedersia and Reaper_2k3, both of you calm down. Flaming is not tolerated on this forum, and I've seen quite a bit of it in your case, Reaper.

Cool it.

Ok. Onedersia and Reaper_2k3, both of you calm down. Flaming is not tolerated on this forum, and I've seen quite a bit of it in your case, Reaper.

Cool it.
you know what i dont understand? how telling people to grow up is inherently worse than anything else i do, especially in the case when the people are whining about nonexistant arguments

hey why dont you get a grip on reality, its over done with, GROW THE FUCK UP, im nto disputing anything, you are trying to argue with me on a nonexistant matter, go have a long, engaging conversation with a wall

You have changed your mind then?

You have changed your mind then?
wall. go talk to wall, i'm sure you can argue with it about why it thinks OJ is innocent

you know what i dont understand? how telling people to grow up is inherently worse than anything else i do, especially in the case when the people are whining about nonexistant arguments


You know what I don't understand? Why someone who is abusive to everyone who disagrees with him suddenly is the victim when people point out that he is being abusive, or complains when people react to his abuse.

Unfortunately I live in this god-forsaken state...and the news of this story just cracked me up. I have no Idea why they left those gifts at the late hour of 10:30...but I do know that lady wasn't an OLD lady...she was 49, lmao.
And she wasn't the only home to get cookies, either.
Oh well...lawsuits for everyone I say...I will be down @ the local starbucks trying to slip and fall if anyone needs me...

wall. go talk to wall, i'm sure you can argue with it about why it thinks OJ is innocent

Are you saying you think OJ is innocent?

Reaper_2k3, if you do not stop being abusive to other users, I will revoke your access to this forum. Consider this an official warning.






http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DrChaotica.jpg
Myrth
Ruler of the Cosmos
Evil Game Moderator

Are you saying you think OJ is innocent?
in short, i hate you. the lnog definition wouldnt be understood somehow

You know what I don't understand? Why someone who is abusive to everyone who disagrees with him suddenly is the victim when people point out that he is being abusive, or complains when people react to his abuse.
no, i genuinely dont understand how telling people to grow up who are obsessing is inherently worse than anything else.

i thought you would explain it instead of some smart ass comment

in short, i hate you. the lnog definition wouldnt be understood somehow

That's nice, that's real, real nice.

in short, i hate you. the lnog definition wouldnt be understood somehow


no, i was asking a bloody question.

I wasn't talking about you telling people to grow up -- I'm talking about you cursing at everyone and using insults rather than refuting their points. If you cannot manage to treat other people with respect here, then you cannot post here.

I wasn't talking about you telling people to grow up -- I'm talking about you cursing at everyone and using insults rather than refuting their points. If you cannot manage to treat other people with respect here, then you cannot post here.
well as far as i can tell, whenver i tell anyone to grow up thats when everything comes down, so with that said everything seems to ponit to telling obsessed people to grow up is inherently the lynch pin

well as far as i can tell, whenver i tell anyone to grow up thats when everything comes down, so with that said everything seems to ponit to telling obsessed people to grow up is inherently the lynch pin

Now that I have clarified the situation, you know this is not the case. Do not flame.

That happened here! And the news is going on and on about it too.

And it shouldn't suprise me that there's a link to a "LAWYER LOCATOR" on the freakin web page with the ARTICLE for this story!!!

It all goes back to the phrase "no good deed ever goes unpunished..."

The woman over reacted, plain and simple.

Ok. Onedersia and Reaper_2k3, both of you calm down. Flaming is not tolerated on this forum, and I've seen quite a bit of it in your case, Reaper.

Cool it.

Errr, I thought a flame was a taunt at another member of the forum. I was simply stating the fact that stupid people abound.

I'll respect the house and watch the language, which by the way shouldn't be censored at all unless it is directed at another person DIRECTLY, because sometimes you just have to call a simple minded fuck just that...

P.C. has killed common sense.

:peace:

Who delivers cookies at 10:30 in the bloody night? "Hey, let's run around this poorly light neighbourhood, knock on our neightbour's door with a bunch of cookies, and not respond when she asks who it is!" Dumb broads.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/04/costly.cookies.ap/index.html

Basically, a couple of teenage girls wanted to surprise a neighbor with home-baked cookies, and end up nearly inadvertently scaring the life out of her. The neighbor, of course, sues them.

What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!

This has to be the dumbest reason for taking someone to court. That woman really needs to grow some balls (pun intended) if two teenagers leaving cookies on her doorstep scare her so.

This has to be the dumbest reason for taking someone to court. That woman really needs to grow some balls (pun intended) if two teenagers leaving cookies on her doorstep scare her so.
if she had caleld the police on them it would be funny, but instead she took them to court even after the parents offered to pay medical expenses. i hope she trips on a orange or something

This has to be the dumbest reason for taking someone to court. That woman really needs to grow some balls (pun intended) if two teenagers leaving cookies on her doorstep scare her so.Read the article before you post. Thank you.

I hope she trips on a orange or something

And then sue the grocery store, the producer of the orange and the transport comapny that got it over there? Oh, and let's not forget municipal authorities, who let an orange lie on the street like that.

Damnedoodle americans. They can always make me laugh :p Some of them anyway.

And then sue the grocery store, the producer of the orange and the transport comapny that got it over there? Oh, and let's not forget municipal authorities, who let an orange lie on the street like that.

Damnedoodle americans. They can always make me laugh :p Some of them anyway.
nah, she would probably just try and sue state of florida

Read the article before you post. Thank you.
I did read the article before I posted.

And I still find stupid of the woman to sue for so little. And I also think she's paranoid to spend all night up and quaking in fear because two "shady characters" knocked on her door a few seconds then ran away without answering.

I mean, did that woman never hear of kids/pranks?

nah, she would probably just try and sue state of florida
That's right. Those damn floridians must pay!They're a danger to society!

You are misinformed. She did NOT put it between her legs and drive off, and McDonalds was sued because they had REPEATEDLY been involved in scald incidents.

http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_mcdonalds.htm


No matter how many they were involved in, it's the consumers fault.

No matter how many they were involved in, it's the consumers fault.

So if I make a product that I know will harm people if they try to use it normally, do not tell them that normal usage will cause harm, and they get hurt, it's somehow *their* fault?

Wow, I'm going to go start a business now. I cause all sorts of harm to people and get away with it!

I did read the article before I posted.

And I still find stupid of the woman to sue for so little. And I also think she's paranoid to spend all night up and quaking in fear because two "shady characters" knocked on her door a few seconds then ran away without answering.

I mean, did that woman never hear of kids/pranks?

The part that amazes me most is that the girls offered to pay medical bills before anything went to court. The lady was obviously just gold-digging at that point, no matter how "insincere" she thought they were being.

The part that amazes me most is that the girls offered to pay medical bills before anything went to court. The lady was obviously just gold-digging at that point, no matter how "insincere" she thought they were being.

In my opinion, offering to pay for medical bills was excessively generous in the first place anyway. The woman clearly overreacted. I'd even go as far as to say this borders on paranoia. I don't think it's the kids' fault if that woman is scared of her own shadow.

How could that woman not figure out who it was anyway? Didn't she at least open her door to take a peek outside after they left running? If she didn't, it places a good deal of the responsibility on her anyway, because if she had, she would have found the cookies and the note.

In my opinion, offering to pay for medical bills was excessively generous in the first place anyway. The woman clearly overreacted. I'd even go as far as to say this borders on paranoia. I don't think it's the kids' fault if that woman is scared of her own shadow.

Absolutely. No reasonable person would expect the girls' actions to result in someone needing medical attention.

How could that woman not figure out who it was anyway? Didn't she at least open her door to take a peek outside after they left running? If she didn't, it places a good deal of the responsibility on her anyway, because if she had, she would have found the cookies and the note.

I once lived in a house in which 4 deadbolts had been put on every door and the windows were nailed and painted shut. Some people are just extremely paranoid.

Granted: There was a crazy guy living across the street and a crack house three houses down, but still - 4 deadbolts and no way to ever open the windows? hehe

That's right. Those damn floridians must pay!They're a danger to society!
yeah, producing all that damned round, slippery fruit

I once lived in a house in which 4 deadbolts had been put on every door and the windows were nailed and painted shut. Some people are just extremely paranoid.

Granted: There was a crazy guy living across the street and a crack house three houses down, but still - 4 deadbolts and no way to ever open the windows? hehe

Geeze, some americans really need to go out of their house more often.

And I don't mean only to get to work or go shopping: I mean actual "getting out and strolling around saying hi to your equally nice neighbours".

Geeze, some americans really need to go out of their house more often.

And I don't mean only to get to work or go shopping: I mean actual "getting out and strolling around saying hi to your equally nice neighbours".
man you crazy that gets people shot

Geeze, some americans really need to go out of their house more often.

And I don't mean only to get to work or go shopping: I mean actual "getting out and strolling around saying hi to your equally nice neighbours".

Yeah, other than the crack house and the frat boys down the street, everyone in that neighboorhood was great, even the crazy guy across the streett. We all looked out for each other, hung out on each others' porches, etc. It was great fun.

Edit: Accidently said the frat boys were great.

man you crazy that gets people shot
I hope this is sarcasm.

If it's not, then you either need to :

a) See a psychologist to work on your social inaptitude problem

b) Move away from the part of town where people get shot for saying "hi" to their neighbours

I hope this is sarcasm.

If it's not, then you either need to :

a) See a psychologist to work on your social inaptitude problem

b) Move away from the part of town where people get shot for saying "hi" to their neighbours
sarcasm

NEW RULE: If you are going to be sarcastic type in all caps without any punctuation to avoid further confusion.

ex. EXPLODE A GIANT BOMB THAT WILL DESTROY THE EARTH WHILE WERE STILL ON IT GREAT IDEA

sarcasm

You see me relieved. :p

The first post must be kidding, dont you realise those cookies might have terrorist links? Maybe you need to consider that before you tell us how to deliver our cookies.

So if I make a product that I know will harm people if they try to use it normally, do not tell them that normal usage will cause harm, and they get hurt, it's somehow *their* fault?

Wow, I'm going to go start a business now. I cause all sorts of harm to people and get away with it!

Stand in line...

Ford
Chrysler
G.M.
Any number of booze producers, not to mention cigarettes, fast food....

Do we really need to go on?

:eek:

This type of thing still amazes me and makes me more worried that the UK is turning into the US. We'll be getting this sort of crap soon (if we haven't already) :(

Stand in line...

Ford
Chrysler
G.M.
Any number of booze producers, not to mention cigarettes, fast food....

Do we really need to go on?

:eek:

Ford, Chyrsler, and G.M. do not make products which, under normal use, will automatically harm the consumer. No reasonable person thinks that they will get in a wreck and be horribly maimed every time they get in a vehicle, nor are the vehicles made that way. Only if the vehicle poses more of a threat than a normal vehicle, and the consumer is not aware of this, can you sue the company.

As for booze and cigarettes, normal use is known to harm period. However, should a producer of either make a *more* harmful than usual product without informing the public, they too would be at risk of getting sued.

:mp5: http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/04/costly.cookies.ap/index.html

Basically, a couple of teenage girls wanted to surprise a neighbor with home-baked cookies, and end up nearly inadvertently scaring the life out of her. The neighbor, of course, sues them.

What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!
its because we dont wanna be botherd in the moring or we wil eather sue u or kill u i mean which one would u like have done for me to sue u or kill u its yr choice :sniper:

Should we put warnings on knifes "Warning may be sharp"? When you use a knife you should be careful with it, if you are walking around with it/or just slip and have an accident it would be stupid to blame the manufacturer of the knife, correct?

Now when you buy coffee it's hot. I don't know about you but my thought would be don't put it in a position to spill it, whether it's at 100 degrees or 180. I'm not going to think "oh it's ok it's not going to do much damage if I spill it becasue it's only x temperature". I'm going to think "If I spill this then it's really going to hurt, so I'll try not to spill it".

I'm not arguing that the coffee was too hot, I think we can all agree that it was. I'm just saying that a bit more care from the consumer would go a long way. I think in the article it said that someone had it dropped into their lap by an employee. Yes in that case you got injured through no fault of your own.

Hope I'm making some sense, I'm tired but can't sleep :(

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/04/costly.cookies.ap/index.html

Basically, a couple of teenage girls wanted to surprise a neighbor with home-baked cookies, and end up nearly inadvertently scaring the life out of her. The neighbor, of course, sues them.

What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!


Judges. The Judge should have thrown the case out.

"The victory wasn't sweet," Young said. "I'm not gloating about it. I just hope the girls learned a lesson."
That lesson being.... Kindness is punishable by law?

I think the inherent problem is that consumers, and people in general, no longer seem to be required to take responsibility for their own actions. They can do really stupid things that end up hurting themselves and sue others for it.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/02/04/costly.cookies.ap/index.html

Basically, a couple of teenage girls wanted to surprise a neighbor with home-baked cookies, and end up nearly inadvertently scaring the life out of her. The neighbor, of course, sues them.

What is it with Americans that makes them so fond of sueing each other?!

The fact that they can so easily with almost no reprocussions.

And here I thought that Bloom County strip that painted America as a bleak, futuristic litigation-phobic wasteland was just a joke. When life imitates art in this case, it's scary.

I'm sueing that lady for giving me shock and making me so mad I had to go to the hospital because I was "shaking and an upset stomach"(what she went for) :headbang:

Should we put warnings on knifes "Warning may be sharp"? When you use a knife you should be careful with it, if you are walking around with it/or just slip and have an accident it would be stupid to blame the manufacturer of the knife, correct?

Now when you buy coffee it's hot. I don't know about you but my thought would be don't put it in a position to spill it, whether it's at 100 degrees or 180. I'm not going to think "oh it's ok it's not going to do much damage if I spill it becasue it's only x temperature". I'm going to think "If I spill this then it's really going to hurt, so I'll try not to spill it".

I'm not arguing that the coffee was too hot, I think we can all agree that it was. I'm just saying that a bit more care from the consumer would go a long way. I think in the article it said that someone had it dropped into their lap by an employee. Yes in that case you got injured through no fault of your own.

Hope I'm making some sense, I'm tired but can't sleep :(

If the knife is so sharp that it cuts through the handle and chops your finger off, you can sue the company, as their product was more dangerous than any knife should be.

Meanwhile, forget spilling the coffee. Drinking it (it's normal use) could have severely burned someone.

If the knife is so sharp that it cuts through the handle and chops your finger off, you can sue the company, as their product was more dangerous than any knife should be.

I guess you haven't seen the hunting knives then have you? Those things could slice right through skin and into bone.

Meanwhile, forget spilling the coffee. Drinking it (it's normal use) could have severely burned someone.

I burn my tongue all the time on coffee.

I guess you haven't seen the hunting knives then have you? Those things could slice right through skin and into bone.

Through the handle?

I burn my tongue all the time on coffee.

Third-degree burns requiring skin grafts?

Through the handle?

He wasn't talking about through the handle Dempublicents. All knives are shart but there is no warning on them. Maybe I should sue the manufacturer if I cut myself with a knife next time.

Third-degree burns requiring skin grafts?

That no but hot coffee burns anyway.

That lesson being.... Kindness is punishable by law?

Thats an excellent way to sum up that article. :rolleyes:

This is almost as stupid as the Americans who sued McDonald’s for making them fat.

He wasn't talking about through the handle Dempublicents. All knives are shart but there is no warning on them. Maybe I should sue the manufacturer if I cut myself with a knife next time.

I was. Yes, knives are sharp - their normal usage is cutting. However, if a knife were so sharp that it cut through the handle during normal use, the company that made it could be sued.

That no but hot coffee burns anyway.

Which is beside the point. During normal use, coffee does not cause third degree burns. It may cause first, and very, very, very rarely second degree burns if you use it normally. However, it does not cause third degree burns during normal use. As such, this particular coffee was much more dangerous than any reasonable person would expect coffee to be. This means that the company was at fault.

As you raise the cup to your lips you can tell if it's going to be too hot or not. I know that personally I can't drink things that are too hot so I test by raising the drink to my lips and feel the heat from it on my lips (yes I might be a bit odd). Also unless you have different containers for coffee in the US (or they were changed after this inncident) but over here I'd say you can have a good guess at the temperature of something just by holding it.

I'm not trying to defend mcdonalds or anything, to be honest I see it as both parties are to blame. Mcdonalds for having the coffee too hot and the woman for not being careful enough with it, I mean putting a container with hot liquid in it between your legs and taking the lid off is just asking for trouble.

As you raise the cup to your lips you can tell if it's going to be too hot or not. I know that personally I can't drink things that are too hot so I test by raising the drink to my lips and feel the heat from it on my lips (yes I might be a bit odd). Also unless you have different containers for coffee in the US (or they were changed after this inncident) but over here I'd say you can have a good guess at the temperature of something just by holding it.

I'm not trying to defend mcdonalds or anything, to be honest I see it as both parties are to blame. Mcdonalds for having the coffee too hot and the woman for not being careful enough with it, I mean putting a container with hot liquid in it between your legs and taking the lid off is just asking for trouble.

Of course, she didn't do that, so I guess she wasn't asking for trouble?

Hmmm, bad phrasing on my part.

Let me try to rephrase it.

With something that you know could hurt you (although it'll be much worse than you realise) you should act with care, and in my opinion she didn't.

I'll put it like this as well (sorry for using the knife analogy again it's first I thought of). To use a knife safely you cut away from you, but if you cut towards you and injure yourself then the injury results from your own actions. The severity of the injury however would depend on the sharpness of the knife.

Of course, she didn't do that, so I guess she wasn't asking for trouble?
yes, she did.

http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_mcdonalds.htm
After the car stopped, she tried to hold the cup securely between her knees while removing the lid. However, the cup tipped over, pouring scalding hot coffee onto her.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
Liebeck placed
the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from
the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled
into her lap.

http://www.atlanet.org/ConsumerMediaResources/Tier3/press_room/FACTS/frivolous/McdonaldsCoffeecase.aspx
Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As Liebeck removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap.

Hmmm, bad phrasing on my part.

Let me try to rephrase it.

With something that you know could hurt you (although it'll be much worse than you realise) you should act with care, and in my opinion she didn't.

I'll put it like this as well (sorry for using the knife analogy again it's first I thought of). To use a knife safely you cut away from you, but if you cut towards you and injure yourself then the injury results from your own actions. The severity of the injury however would depend on the sharpness of the knife.

In this case, imagine a knife designed to cut the hell out of you if you follow the rules and cut away from yourself. *That* is what we are talking about here.

Yes, the woman spilled coffee and, had the coffee been normal coffee with normal risk, any lawsuit she brought would have been frivolous. However, the coffee was *not* normal coffee - it was more than 35 times more likely to cause significant damage to her, even during normal usage. As such, the company was at fault for producing a product more dangerous than any reasonable person would think.

I have no issue with you regarding the dangerous coffee.
Yes they served the coffee too hot and ignored warnings from other inncidents and needed to cool it down a tad.
I think we both agree on that.

What I'm trying to say is this particular situation only occured because of what she did with the hot coffee cup. If she hadn't placed it between her legs and taken the lid off then it probably wouldn't have happened.

Therefore in my eys although mcdonalds supplied the instrument to injure her, she herself caused the damage.

In this case, imagine a knife designed to cut the hell out of you if you follow the rules and cut away from yourself. *That* is what we are talking about here.


No we're not (well I'm not anyway).

She acted stupidly with a hot liquid and got burned because of it. If she had left the lid on or simply not put it between her legs I doubt she'd have been injured since the lid would have been on and it wouldn't have spilt out, and even if it had then if it had been on the floor, or something where in my opinion a sensible person would put a hot drink, the spillage wouldn't have caused as much damage since it wouldn't have been in her lap

A question for coffee drinkers. What is the "normal" temperature of served coffee? If anyone tries to sell me a cup of coffee which is colder than 170 degrees I would find it insulting. Coffee is supposed to be HOT, not warm, hot. 200 is maybe a bit too much though.

I've said it before but...

Holy threadjacking Batman!

Oh well, at least it's still in the field of "frivolous" law suits.

A question for coffee drinkers. What is the "normal" temperature of served coffee? If anyone tries to sell me a cup of coffee which is colder than 170 degrees I would find it insulting. Coffee is supposed to be HOT, not warm, hot. 200 is maybe a bit too much though.

Umm...

http://www.tap-water-burn.com/

An approximate one-second exposure to 160° F water will result in third degree burns.

You wouldn't happen to have a throat made of asbestos, would you? :)

You wouldn't happen to have a throat made of asbestos, would you? :)
:D
Obviously!
Not really. I pour some milk in it and that cools it down. If the coffee would be only about 140 degrees it would be only handwarm after I add milk. yack!

And first sips should burn a little. I like that...

:D
Obviously!
Not really. I pour some milk in it and that cools it down. If the coffee would be only about 140 degrees it would be only handwarm after I add milk. yack!

And first sips should burn a little. I like that...


Ah, as a person that usually drinks his coffee with 1/3 volume milk, I can agree with that. However, this McDonalds thing isn't really applicable to that since the coffee there is served with milk already added if you ask for it. Also, not many people drive around with a bottle of milk in the glove compartment...

Ah, as a person that usually drinks his coffee with 1/3 volume milk, I can agree with that. However, this McDonalds thing isn't really applicable to that since the coffee there is served with milk already added if you ask for it. Also, not many people drive around with a bottle of milk in the glove compartment...
No, no. Only a hint of milk. :)
Some people just can drink hot liquids more easily. My boyfriend has usually finished his coffee when I'm still taking small sips of mine.

And by experience I do know that it's a bad idea to place your coffee cup between your legs (while driving). You will get burned.

But by everything I've read about this McDonalds incident, the company should have paid compensations. (which they did)

This is almost as stupid as the Americans who sued McDonald’s for making them fat.

Luckily, that got tossed right out of court!

yes, she did.

http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_mcdonalds.htm


http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm


http://www.atlanet.org/ConsumerMediaResources/Tier3/press_room/FACTS/frivolous/McdonaldsCoffeecase.aspx

WOW!! I agree with Chess Squares on something. Hell must be freezing over by now.

*Dies of a heart Attack*

A question for coffee drinkers. What is the "normal" temperature of served coffee? If anyone tries to sell me a cup of coffee which is colder than 170 degrees I would find it insulting. Coffee is supposed to be HOT, not warm, hot. 200 is maybe a bit too much though.

I don't know but I drink McDonald's coffee all the time and find it to be at a good temperature. McDonald's to hot? Maybe to some but not to me.

I do believe though that it is about a person's taste.

Besides that, I normally leave the coffee lid on while I drink McDonald's coffee unless I'm pouring it into a travel mug.

Besides that, I normally leave the coffee lid on while I drink McDonald's coffee unless I'm pouring it into a travel mug.

If you spill it and scald/burn yourself you should sue mcdonalds because it seems only the temperature of the coffee matters, not what you're doing with it :D

If you spill it and scald/burn yourself you should sue mcdonalds because it seems only the temperature of the coffee matters, not what you're doing with it :D

So very true but it is not worth the effort to sue over the temperature of the coffee.

I have no issue with you regarding the dangerous coffee.
Yes they served the coffee too hot and ignored warnings from other inncidents and needed to cool it down a tad.
I think we both agree on that.

What I'm trying to say is this particular situation only occured because of what she did with the hot coffee cup. If she hadn't placed it between her legs and taken the lid off then it probably wouldn't have happened.

Therefore in my eys although mcdonalds supplied the instrument to injure her, she herself caused the damage.

Any normal person who does not drink their coffee black is going to take the lid off to put cream and/or sugar in. Even if the coffee had been set on a table at the time, the heat could have caused her to spill it all over herself.

Meanwhile, let's remember that the woman didn't sue in the first place. She requested only that her medical bills be paid, as McDonald's was obviously negligent. When they refused, she had to bring the lawsuit against them.

No we're not (well I'm not anyway).

She acted stupidly with a hot liquid and got burned because of it. If she had left the lid on or simply not put it between her legs I doubt she'd have been injured since the lid would have been on and it wouldn't have spilt out, and even if it had then if it had been on the floor, or something where in my opinion a sensible person would put a hot drink, the spillage wouldn't have caused as much damage since it wouldn't have been in her lap

Normal usage of coffee often requires taking the lid off. And the damage would have been done even if she had been sitting at a table and the coffee spilled onto her lap.

A question for coffee drinkers. What is the "normal" temperature of served coffee? If anyone tries to sell me a cup of coffee which is colder than 170 degrees I would find it insulting. Coffee is supposed to be HOT, not warm, hot. 200 is maybe a bit too much though.

Normal coffee makers make the coffee at about 130 degrees. Standards in restaurants are no higher than 150. The McDonald's coffee was at 180.

I don't know but I drink McDonald's coffee all the time and find it to be at a good temperature. McDonald's to hot? Maybe to some but not to me.

That could be because they cooled it down after the lawsuit and now keep it at a normal temperature.

Besides that, I normally leave the coffee lid on while I drink McDonald's coffee unless I'm pouring it into a travel mug.

You must drink coffee black. Many, many people do not.

So very true but it is not worth the effort to sue over the temperature of the coffee.

If a car is made so that it explodes with only a slight impact, it is not worth the effor to sue over the defect in the car.

Normal usage of coffee often requires taking the lid off. And the damage would have been done even if she had been sitting at a table and the coffee spilled onto her lap.
But she chose to open the hot coffee at a time with a higher probability of spilling at least some.

If you spill it and scald/burn yourself you should sue mcdonalds because it seems only the temperature of the coffee matters, not what you're doing with it :D

McDonald's was well aware (although they did lie about it in court, which probably upped the damages quite a bit) that most people drink their coffee while still in the car. This lady was being much more safe than most people, who tend to attempt to drink it while driving.

If a car is made so that it explodes with only a slight impact, it is not worth the effor to sue over the defect in the car.
Its a defect for coffee to be hot? (30 degree difference from the suposed temp to a hot cup in a resteraunt)

Its a defect for coffee to be hot? (30 degree difference from the suposed temp to a hot cup in a resteraunt)

Considering that it can cause third-degree burns in less than a second, which is not a property of normal coffee, yes - that is definitely a defect. That 30 degrees is the difference between the normal burn you get on your tongue after drinking coffee and requiring skin grafts.

McDonald's claimed that their coffee was kept at this temperature because most people drove for at least thirty minutes before drinking it - thus allowing it to cool down to a safe temperature. However, their own market research demonstrated that most customers attempted to drink the coffee immediately. As such, without a warning stating "do not drink for ~30 minutes," McDonald's was placing its customers in danger.

McDonald's was well aware (although they did lie about it in court, which probably upped the damages quite a bit) that most people drink their coffee while still in the car. This lady was being much more safe than most people, who tend to attempt to drink it while driving.

It often amazes me that people get so incensed when massive punitive damages are awarded after defense counsedl suborns perjury/engages in offensive tactics in court.

I understand that this is anything but following the law, but still what the fuck do they expect. Spend six weeks lying to, patronizing, and condescending to the jury and the plaintiffs, and it's a fucking mystery why the jury sticks to you at the end.

What's even worse is then they cry about it ito the media. Grow up. Honestly, high priced lawyers are often their own worst enemy. Still, what can we expect with the law school, big firm recruiting system. It's almost guaranteed to put the socially inept in the job.

My favorite case was in florida. The pilot seat in a Cessna collapsed while flying (now that's pretty fucked up to begin with). The lawyers for cessna then spent three months blaming a paraplegic in a wheel chair (the plaintiff), for the accident on the grounds that if he had been a better pilot, he would have been able to land the plane, even after the seat collapsed. Hence the accident was his fault not cessna's.

They were shocked when the jury awarded $380 million. :rolleyes:

Considering that it can cause third-degree burns in less than a second, which is not a property of normal coffee, yes - that is definitely a defect. That 30 degrees is the difference between the normal burn you get on your tongue after drinking coffee and requiring skin grafts.

McDonald's claimed that their coffee was kept at this temperature because most people drove for at least thirty minutes before drinking it - thus allowing it to cool down to a safe temperature. However, their own market research demonstrated that most customers attempted to drink the coffee immediately. As such, without a warning stating "do not drink for ~30 minutes," McDonald's was placing its customers in danger.
So how hot is too hot for hot coffee?

So how hot is too hot for hot coffee?

Normal coffee makers are at 130. Most restaurants don't serve coffee above 150. Probably anything about 150 is dangerous. In fact, if I remember correctly, that was the temperature that was suggested to McDonald's after the first few cases and is also the temperatures recommended by the coffee maker they were using.

It often amazes me that people get so incensed when massive punitive damages are awarded after defense counsedl suborns perjury/engages in offensive tactics in court.

I understand that this is anything but following the law, but still what the fuck do they expect. Spend six weeks lying to, patronizing, and condescending to the jury and the plaintiffs, and it's a fucking mystery why the jury sticks to you at the end.

What's even worse is then they cry about it ito the media. Grow up. Honestly, high priced lawyers are often their own worst enemy. Still, what can we expect with the law school, big firm recruiting system. It's almost guaranteed to put the socially inept in the job.

My favorite case was in florida. The pilot seat in a Cessna collapsed while flying (now that's pretty fucked up to begin with). The lawyers for cessna then spent three months blaming a paraplegic in a wheel chair (the plaintiff), for the accident on the grounds that if he had been a better pilot, he would have been able to land the plane, even after the seat collapsed. Hence the accident was his fault not cessna's.

They were shocked when the jury awarded $380 million. :rolleyes:


Of course, this goes the other way as well. There are fairly often lawsuits from plaintiffs with no basis. However, the plaintiff looks all pitiful, the defense is rightfully outraged at even being charged, and the jury awards a huge settlement.

Happened to a doctor in Pittsburg not that long ago. The doctor was performing a fairly routine laproscopic surgery. Even if a doctor does absolutely everything right, there is a 10% chance of bile duct injury. If the injury is noticed and repaired at the time, the only lasting effect is a slightly larger scar. That is what happened in this case. The woman tried to extort money, the doctor refused. It went to court and the jury, biased against doctors as juries often are, awarded 15 million. Now remember, this woman has absolutely nothing wrong with her. The judge told them that they needed to reconsider, so they came out with 20 milliion instead.

Normal coffee makers are at 130. Most restaurants don't serve coffee above 150. Probably anything about 150 is dangerous. In fact, if I remember correctly, that was the temperature that was suggested to McDonald's after the first few cases and is also the temperatures recommended by the coffee maker they were using.
No they dont serve it above not because of danger rather prefference in standard machines

Here is some info that I could find

Others call it a tempest in a coffeepot. A spokesman for the National Coffee Association says McDonald's coffee conforms to industry temperature standards. And a spokesman for Mr. Coffee Inc., the coffee-machine maker, says that if customer complaints are any indication, industry settings may be too low - some customers like it hotter. A spokeswoman for Starbucks Coffee Co. adds, "Coffee is traditionally a hot beverage and is served hot and I would hope that this is an isolated incident."

Coffee connoisseur William McAlpin, an importer and wholesaler in Bar Harbor, Maine, who owns a coffee plantation in Costa Rica, says 175 degrees is "probably the optimum temperature, because that's when aromatics are being released. Once the aromas get in your palate, that is a large part of what makes the coffee a pleasure to drink."

http://www.vanfirm.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm

there seems to be a whole lot of arguing on what temp is best though from the sight of most of them are around 10 deges difference (with some saying as high as 204 for preperation and 190 for serving) as optimal

Ehhh thats what you get for trying to drink liquid in a vehicle

No they dont serve it above not because of danger rather prefference in standard machines

Here is some info that I could find

http://www.vanfirm.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm

there seems to be a whole lot of arguing on what temp is best though from the sight of most of them are around 10 deges difference (with some saying as high as 204 for preperation and 190 for serving) as optimal

Ehhh thats what you get for trying to drink liquid in a vehicle

Everything I have seen has stated that 180 degrees can cause third degree burns almost instantly. This is inherently more dangerous than anyone expects their coffee to be.

Meanwhile, how is drinking your coffee in a parked car different from drinking it sitting in a chair?

Everything I have seen has stated that 180 degrees can cause third degree burns almost instantly. This is inherently more dangerous than anyone expects their coffee to be.

Meanwhile, how is drinking your coffee in a parked car different from drinking it sitting in a chair?
I personaly find it more cramped and less movement ... my elbow's tend to hit stuff I generaly dont eat at all in the car because of this (got a truck so I tailgate it)
I tend to spill stuff (not coffee but usualy pop) not all the time but I know it is more likly (that and to get cloths more messy)

Generaly I prefer sitting down in a resteraunt that or not eatin at all ... but thats me maybe I am wierd (being 6'3" I have a tendancy to feel cramped in a lot of places lol)

Of course, this goes the other way as well. There are fairly often lawsuits from plaintiffs with no basis. However, the plaintiff looks all pitiful, the defense is rightfully outraged at even being charged, and the jury awards a huge settlement.

Happened to a doctor in Pittsburg not that long ago. The doctor was performing a fairly routine laproscopic surgery. Even if a doctor does absolutely everything right, there is a 10% chance of bile duct injury. If the injury is noticed and repaired at the time, the only lasting effect is a slightly larger scar. That is what happened in this case. The woman tried to extort money, the doctor refused. It went to court and the jury, biased against doctors as juries often are, awarded 15 million. Now remember, this woman has absolutely nothing wrong with her. The judge told them that they needed to reconsider, so they came out with 20 milliion instead.

Oh no doubt. But you said a magic word there when talking about juries: "Pittsburg". That's like saying "Bronx", or "Philadelphia." And I don't really blame lawyers when that happens. I blame high school teachers.

I very much doubt that would have happened had the case been tried in Westchester or Orange County, but stupid vindictive lawyering can cause I disaster in any jurisdiction.

Everything I have seen has stated that 180 degrees can cause third degree burns almost instantly. This is inherently more dangerous than anyone expects their coffee to be.

Meanwhile, how is drinking your coffee in a parked car different from drinking it sitting in a chair?

Because if you spill it on a table there is a good chance that you can get out of the way/avoid most of the spillage. If nothing else you can pretty much immediatly stand up and hold your clothes away from you (unless they are tight ftting). In a car you are basically trapped to just sit there and get burned. Even if you do get out the car it'll still take longer and increase the time the coffee is in contact with you.

I've never drunk a hot drink in a car and don't think I ever will. Possibly like UpwardThrust I'm reasonably tall 6'2" and like room to move.

Because if you spill it on a table there is a good chance that you can get out of the way/avoid most of the spillage. If nothing else you can pretty much immediatly stand up and hold your clothes away from you (unless they are tight ftting). In a car you are basically trapped to just sit there and get burned. Even if you do get out the car it'll still take longer.

I've never drunk a hot drink in a car and don't think I ever will.

Sweatpants can't really be "held away from you." She would have had to take them off. Can you get your clothes off in less than a second?

Can you get your clothes off in less than a second?

Why can't women say that to me in real life? :fluffle:

Can you see the point I was trying to make though? It is safer at a table rather than in a car.

Why can't women say that to me in real life? :fluffle:

Can you see the point I was trying to make though? It is safer at a table rather than in a car.

I've seen someone get third degree burns from food at a table while wearing sweatpants. Anything that can burn your skin that quickly is going to do so if it hits your skin and is held against it.

I've seen someone get third degree burns from food at a table while wearing sweatpants. Anything that can burn your skin that quickly is going to do so if it hits your skin and is held against it.
A lot of things in real life can hurt us … hot coffee among them (irregardless of if it is 150 180 or 205) I personally am just as wary of any hot drink that I am carrying without knowing the individual temp of it and that it is dangerous to spill possibly. I just don’t see how someone else could not know it was hot and that you shouldn’t spill it on you.

A lot of things in real life can hurt us … hot coffee among them (irregardless of if it is 150 180 or 205) I personally am just as wary of any hot drink that I am carrying without knowing the individual temp of it and that it is dangerous to spill possibly. I just don’t see how someone else could not know it was hot and that you shouldn’t spill it on you.

Normal use means that some people are going to spill. This is a part of life. However, normal use does not mean that you will get third degree burns over 8% of your body. See the difference?

The issue is normal use. If you drive vehicles long enough, statistics are very clear that you will most likely get in an accident of some sort - under normal use. Thus, if you get in an accident, you have no call to sue the car company. However, if the company makes a car that is more dangerous than all other cars - for instance, a car that explodes during a fender bender, you have a right to sue. The company put out a product that was more dangerous than other products and would be dangerous during normal use.

Yes but imagine how much worse it would be to basically sit in the hot liquid.

But to get back on topic about scaring people and getting sued. When I was younger I used to deliver newspapers and there was a fair few occasions when you are standing at the door ready to post it though the letterbox when the door opens. The amount of people that jump when they see someone unexpectedly standing there is quite high. Now if someone had a heart attack (or something) and sued me, would anyone think it was a justified claim?

Yes but imagine how much worse it would be to basically sit in the hot liquid.

But to get back on topic about scaring people and getting sued. When I was younger I used to deliver newspapers and there was a fair few occasions when you are standing at the door ready to post it though the letterbox when the door opens. The amount of people that jump when they see someone unexpectedly standing there is quite high. Now if someone had a heart attack (or something) and sued me, would anyone think it was a justified claim?

Nope, they ordered the paper and they know you are coming. Also, there was no intent. You had no idea they were about to open the door, nor were you trying to scare them.

Yes but imagine how much worse it would be to basically sit in the hot liquid.

But to get back on topic about scaring people and getting sued. When I was younger I used to deliver newspapers and there was a fair few occasions when you are standing at the door ready to post it though the letterbox when the door opens. The amount of people that jump when they see someone unexpectedly standing there is quite high. Now if someone had a heart attack (or something) and sued me, would anyone think it was a justified claim?
you should sue them :) you were scheduled to be there ... they wernt :-D they probably scared you by opening the door lol

The people that bug the hell out of me are the frivolous malpractice suits. If you are going in for a medical procedure, especially surgery, you are in danger. Doctors are required to tell you the risks of the procedure and you are required to sign a form saying you understand if there are significant risks.

At that point, if one of the known risks occurs, who they hell do you think you are to sue the doctor? Unless actual negligence can be shown, people need to remember that health professionals are human beings - they are not God. If your body is broken, it may not be able to be fixed.

I think all malpractice lawsuits should be reviewed by an independent panel of doctors before going to the judge. They can make recomendations on whether or not there is a case and the judge can throw it out if she sees fit.

The people that bug the hell out of me are the frivolous malpractice suits. If you are going in for a medical procedure, especially surgery, you are in danger. Doctors are required to tell you the risks of the procedure and you are required to sign a form saying you understand if there are significant risks.

At that point, if one of the known risks occurs, who they hell do you think you are to sue the doctor? Unless actual negligence can be shown, people need to remember that health professionals are human beings - they are not God. If your body is broken, it may not be able to be fixed.

I think all malpractice lawsuits should be reviewed by an independent panel of doctors before going to the judge. They can make recomendations on whether or not there is a case and the judge can throw it out if she sees fit.
No kidding … my neighbor is an Anesthesiologist (head) He said working out in California if you were an almost flawless Anesthesiologist you would MAYBE get by in a year with only 1 law suit.
(out here it is slower paced)

Not to mention obstetrics (18 year statute of limitations) … insurance for obstetrics is 12 – 14 times as much as their yearly salary

Silliness

That could be because they cooled it down after the lawsuit and now keep it at a normal temperature.

Hmmm I've been drinking coffee most of my life so I've been drinking it before this.

You must drink coffee black. Many, many people do not.

Then they kill the flavor of the coffee. Its best drinking it black to really get at the flavor.

If a car is made so that it explodes with only a slight impact, it is not worth the effor to sue over the defect in the car.

If it explodes after a slight impact while I'm in the car, don't you think I'll be dead?

If I'm dead, can I possibly file a lawsuit?

Besides, we're talking apples and oranges here. THere are safety standards to meet on automobiles.

Of course, this goes the other way as well. There are fairly often lawsuits from plaintiffs with no basis. However, the plaintiff looks all pitiful, the defense is rightfully outraged at even being charged, and the jury awards a huge settlement.

Happened to a doctor in Pittsburg not that long ago. The doctor was performing a fairly routine laproscopic surgery. Even if a doctor does absolutely everything right, there is a 10% chance of bile duct injury. If the injury is noticed and repaired at the time, the only lasting effect is a slightly larger scar. That is what happened in this case. The woman tried to extort money, the doctor refused. It went to court and the jury, biased against doctors as juries often are, awarded 15 million. Now remember, this woman has absolutely nothing wrong with her. The judge told them that they needed to reconsider, so they came out with 20 milliion instead.

And this is a reason why we need to cap such things! What a frivolus lawsuit that was. I remember hearing about that and shook my head. And people wonder why doctors are folding up shop and leaving this god damn state.

Edit: Its Pittsburgh not Pittsburg! You forgot the h

I'm I the only one who thinks Dempublicents is a personal injury lawyer?

Mr. Lawyer (directed at no one imparticular)..

Please stop sucking the intelligence out of this country. I'm sorry to say it but stupid people need to be eradicated from the gene pool, not awarded million dollar settlements for being asses about themselves, let natural selection take its course. You, yourself are in it or nothing more than personal gain, and its done at the expense of others. You can't honestly tell me that saving the world from scalding coffee is what you had in mind when you took the bar.
Please dont get me wrong about lawyer bashing, I think there is a need for people to stand up and champion those who have no voice, but damn it man how can you sleep at night knowing you helped further a generation of morons and greedy incompetents.
I say if you, Mr. Lawyer, are going to sue someone for negligence you should be required to place your firms money in an escrow account until the end of the trial equal to court costs incurred by both the litigants and the court. And if your baseless, ignorant, frivolous suit is tossed out on its ass where it belonged then that money is surrendered to the court for use as they see fit. Lets see how fast you want to defend some drunken lawn dart tosser when its your Porsche payment in the balance.

:finger:

I think the article can be summarised as so: Bitch.

If it explodes after a slight impact while I'm in the car, don't you think I'll be dead?

If I'm dead, can I possibly file a lawsuit?

Besides, we're talking apples and oranges here. THere are safety standards to meet on automobiles.

Your family can sue.

All corporations are responsible for making their product as safe as possible.

I'm I the only one who thinks Dempublicents is a personal injury lawyer?

Did you miss my post about frivolous malpractice lawsuits?

Your family can sue.

All corporations are responsible for making their product as safe as possible.

Hence Product Testing! WHy do you think Cars go through massive crash tests? There are government safety protocals to be met when it comes to automobiles.

I'll give you the second part but you also have to remember that guns don't kill people! People kill people. As for McDonald's coffee, if its too hot, have you ever consider the possibility that it could be the type of coffee maker they are using?

They have on the coffee cups:

Caution: Contents maybe HOT!!!!

Anyone that sues over hot coffee when THAT is on the cups is a moron!


It's a Big Pig nation in America right now, and it's quickly self destructing from its own excess. The only reason Lawyers are so prevalent is because the death of communities. The corps have pretty much converted communities into cosumerist havens and everyone is trained from an early age to fear everything and everyone. So everyone grows up with a few friends and everyone else is a potential enemy.

Combine that with a juggernaut legal system that is based on precedents garnered from stupid decisions that really really rich white men decide for their really really rich friends and you end up with Corporations (whos original duty was to hoard resources for larger projects that no one sole ownership business could do by itself, like, build the golden gate bridge) able to declare themselves "humans" under the anti-slavery laws...

Now these corporations, whos human factors is all but demolished, and replaced with "policies" the only way of settling disputes is through lawyers...

In this case I would knock on little old womans door, ask to come in, and speak with her for a long time over tea and ask if she needs anything, because, obviously, if she is suing my daughter, then she's obviously lonely, or hurt or something... I bet she just is lonely and watching Fox or CNN or some other "scaretheshitoutofyourandtheterroristsareonyourdoorstepanditcouldbeanyone!!!!" corporate news station.

I'm sure she would be very thankful to have my children helping her around the house every tuesday, while we talk over a coffee in the kitchen.

Luckily, I don't live in the US, so most of these idiotic things end up being thrown out of our courts. Everyone would look at it, laugh and say "the hell?"
Of course, there would be no medical bills anyways, because no one pays for medical help here, and the seniors drugs are low cost here too, because we don't have corporations GOUGING people for money.

Anyways, crazy-land will end just as sure as laws will be enacted against the formation of corporations in the future. That will be world war three. You can hear it coming if you listen close... Boom Iraq, Boom Iran, Boom Uk and US in flames... It will be like when the Romans were conquered by the barbarian hoardes... ;P Then the land will regrow and be healthy and safe again, and the people of the world will come together in harmony and respect, freedom from religion laws will come into place to protect us from relgious nutjobs from ever proporting their hateful racist and bigoted viewpoints and no corporation can ever own a news station ever again. Better yet, no corporations to try and turn our people into wage slaves ever again. :rolleyes:

Sorry for ranting, I just am at awe with the hypocracy of it all...

Hence Product Testing! WHy do you think Cars go through massive crash tests? There are government safety protocals to be met when it comes to automobiles.

I'll give you the second part but you also have to remember that guns don't kill people! People kill people. As for McDonald's coffee, if its too hot, have you ever consider the possibility that it could be the type of coffee maker they are using?

Actually, the type of coffee maker they were using had different settings. They intentionally set it higher than other restaurants.

By the way, there are also safety regulations to be met when you work in food services.

Actually, the type of coffee maker they were using had different settings. They intentionally set it higher than other restaurants.

By the way, there are also safety regulations to be met when you work in food services.

Odd, I didn't think there was a regulation on how hot Coffee must be!

Odd, I didn't think there was a regulation on how hot Coffee must be!

It isn't directly related, but have you ever heard of something called "Good Manufacturing Processes"?

Something doesn't have to be legislated for it to be accepted as industry standard because it is the safest way to do things.

You are misinformed. She did NOT put it between her legs and drive off, and McDonalds was sued because they had REPEATEDLY been involved in scald incidents.

http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_mcdonalds.htm

Between her knees or between her legs, what's the difference? It was still stupid. Yes the coffee was hot, maybe too hot, but to say that McDonalds is wholely liable for someone elses stupidity is beyond belief.

Between her knees or between her legs, what's the difference? It was still stupid. Yes the coffee was hot, maybe too hot, but to say that McDonalds is wholely liable for someone elses stupidity is beyond belief.

I agree. The lady is mostly responsible for what happened, NOT McDonalds. I always get their coffee. I have never burned myself be it mouth, hands, legs, what have you.

Any moron that tried to do what she did, is insane. My Dad takes lids off their coffee but he always does it outside so that he doesn't get burned. That is called, using a brain. Obviously this lady didn't have one.

Actually, the type of coffee maker they were using had different settings. They intentionally set it higher than other restaurants.

By the way, there are also safety regulations to be met when you work in food services.
And the coffee maker recomdended as high as 205 which is HIGHER then the temp they had it at

Way to make up a bunch of BS.

The woman was not driving, was in a PARKED car. When she opened it, it was hot enough to spill out on its own.

Meanwhile, the coffee was so hot that it was able to cause third degree burns over a significant portion of her body in about 7 seconds.

McDonald's knew that their coffee was too hot, had already received warnings and several complaints, and did nothing about it.

On top of that, the woman originally asked only for medical bills and was denied.

What I said was just kind of a throwaway statement regarding stupid lawsuits. It was not intended to present the case in a wholely factual light. I was just trying to present it as a supporting example. I still maintain that it was a stupid lawsuit. Was this the womens first cup of coffee? Was it her first cup of McDonalds coffee? I doubt it. In which case she was aware that the coffee was hot, really really hot. She was careless and got burned. It is an affliction of our society that people feel the need to blame everyone but themselves when they do something stupid to cause themselves harm. If you repeatedly buy a product which you are aware is unsafe, it does not seem reasonable to sue when you are harmed by it.

Dempublicents, I think you need a chill pill. You have, with me as an unintended accomplice, hijacked a thread about girls scaring some stupid woman, and turned it into a debate over hot coffee.

I'll take this opportunity to appologize to Cromotar. I did not intend for your thread to be so rudely turned into a debate over McDonalds coffee. :headbang:

S.F.Z.

The woman was not driving, was in a PARKED car. When she opened it, it was hot enough to spill out on its own.


what is the temperature at which coffee leaps out of the cup? are you telling me it was actually still churning at boiling point, producing steam at the bottom so violently that it threw the coffee out of the cup? cos if you are, i don't believe you.

what is the temperature at which coffee leaps out of the cup? are you telling me it was actually still churning at boiling point, producing steam at the bottom so violently that it threw the coffee out of the cup? cos if you are, i don't believe you.
Yes, nothing to do with the fact that she had squeezed the cup between her knees...

I'll take this opportunity to appologize to Cromotar. I did not intend for your thread to be so rudely turned into a debate over McDonalds coffee. :headbang:


That's all right. Once created, threads on this forum tend to take on a life of their own. Besides, like I said before, at least the debate is in the same field, namely frivolous lawsuits. Usually when threads go off topic they go somewhere else entirely... :D

That's all right. Once created, threads on this forum tend to take on a life of their own. Besides, like I said before, at least the debate is in the same field, namely frivolous lawsuits. Usually when threads go off topic they go somewhere else entirely... :D
Like god SUX0R5!!!!! LOL

But if the topic is frivolous lawsuits here is one


Stupid Lawsuit: A 21-year-old New Haven, Connecticut man, who last summer led Hamden police on a high-speed chase in his all-terrain vehicle before crashing into a utility pole, now wants the town to pay his medical bills.

Britt Martin claims that five officers were responsible for his injuries because they violated a Police Department policy to discontinue high-speed pursuits when the risk exceeds the need for immediate apprehension.

Martin's lawsuit states that continuing the police pursuit was "reckless, unnecessary, and unwarranted." Hey, how about your reckless, unnecessary and unwarranted driving style, Britt baby?

Making sure he had all his lawsuit bases covered, the Police Chief is also named in the complaint for failing to order the termination of the police chase.

Martin reportedly fractured his right leg, right foot, left arm, and left elbow, and received numerous other cuts and bruises in the accident. He demands compensation for an unspecified cost of medical treatment.

The police report stated that the primary officer charged in the lawsuit responded to a complaint that a man was driving a four-wheel all-terrain vehicle at excessive speed and in a reckless manner on city streets.

The officer reportedly observed the suspect on Wintergreen Avenue and engaged in pursuit. Martin's ATV drove into New Haven, through the parking lot of an elderly housing complex, and back into Hamden.

While ole Britt was crusing around town, the officer observed him running through red lights, making illegal turns and driving well in excess of the speed limit during the chase.

The officer's report said he broke off the pursuit of the speeding off-road vehicle twice, finally apprehending Martin at the accident scene.

Martin was charged with reckless driving, driving an unregistered motor vehicle, driving an uninsured motor vehicle and driving without a license.

How about adding a charge for his BS lawsuit as well?

Source: The Hamden Journal (Connecticut), "Cops blamed for ATV crash," December 29, 2004.