I have to chime in here. we all have an opinion in areas that are "urban myth", even when we don't necessarily know the facts. In many instances we comment when we have anecdotal information.

Juries aren't idiots and you wouldn't be either if you were asked to serve on one. They generally don't award money to fakers. Here are pretty much the same facts that the Mcdonalds jury had before their deliberation for the coffee burn.

Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson's car when she was severely burned by McDonalds' coffee in February 1992. Liebeck, 79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served in a styrofoam cup at the drivethru window of a local McDonalds.

After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) 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.

The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused.

During discovery (where each side has to share documents in their possession), McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard.

McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to "maintain optimum taste". The McDonalds expert admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.

Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing
the "holding temperature" of its coffee because they sold more coffee at that temperature.

The Plaintiffs' expert, a scholar in thermodynamics applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn.

McDonalds asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there. (Yeah, right) However, the companys own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving.

McDonalds also argued that consumers know coffee is hot and that its customers want it that way. The company admitted its customers were unaware that they could suffer third degree burns from the coffee and that a statement on the side of the cup was not a "warning" but a "reminder" since the location of the writing would not warn customers of the hazard.

The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages. This amount was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found Liebeck 20 percent at fault in the spill.

The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, because they showed McDonalds knew of the hazard and didn't give a care. The punitive award was equal to about two days of McDonalds' coffee sales.

Post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the many McDonalds had dropped to 158 degrees fahrenheit.

(The trial court subsequently reduced the punitive award to $480,000 -- or three times compensatory damages -- even though the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous and willful.)
The parties eventually entered into a secret settlement which has never been revealed to the public, despite the fact that this was a public case, litigated in public and subjected to extensive media reporting. Such secret settlements, after public trials, should not be condoned.

Now you have new info when folk anecdotally bring up the "McDonalds Case", about the person who was "stupid enough to get burned by coffee and got rich".

 

with everyone all rambling on and on..for the ppl accusing me of hitting this cat head on aint right. the cat ended up with a broken jaw because he didnt hit the front of my car he ran into the side of my vehicle as i was moving by. the cat wasnt in front of my car when i hit it. as i was passing by i saw it through my driver side window running accross the street while i was driving by. in my mind even if i slammed on my brakes or slowed down i would have still hit the cat because hes running perpendicular to my car. i was just hoping he wouldnt catch my back tires because my front tires had already passed him up. if i slowed down i probably would have ran him over killing him quicker instead of just breaking its jaw. i wouldnt have swarved out the way because this is a neighborhood street filled with cars parked next to the street. i know if i would have hit something it would ahve been my ___ not anyone elses responsibility. i never said this cat was in front of my car nor was i waiting to wait for it to move out the way.

 

alright anthonie you're off the hook

 

Wow, this thread just keeps growing and growing. But yeah, as I stated, it was 6AM when I posted that, and I hadn't slept all night. What I meant to post, was that you are statistically more likely to be killed in an auto accident, then those other factors I listed. Yes, comparing terrorism to car accidents is stupid. Yes, you have to account for location. Yes, stats can be twisted to prove a point.

But here are some starter links for you guys, listed from simplest to read to longest:
http://www.asirt.org/webfactslideshow.pdf
http://www.asirt.org/about.htm
http://www.crashtest.com/explanations/stats/stats.htm (a little outdated, but still valid)
http://www.safecarguide.com/exp/stat...statistics.htm
http://econ.worldbank.org/external/d...03051404103341

Bottom line, all that ruckus about SARS and birdflu are really lame. . . considering the high rate of auto-deaths. Cancer and AIDS are still a big deal, sure, but it's not like MILLIONS OF PEOPLE are being blown up per year in terrorist attacks. And you see all the media make a huge ruckus everytime a goat dies in the middle east. Far more people are killed in auto accidents. Those links should be good enough, but if I missed something, please point it out to me. I'm not one to just shut my ears and tell people to "never come back to the internet." I'm not scared of being wrong.

And no, McDonald's does not cause obesity. . . people who can't control their eating/excericise do. McDonald's exists all over the world. . . and in most foreign countries, it isn't all that popular/profitable; at least compared to the domestic market. Americans are fat because we like food and we're too lazy to workout. If you think McDonald's is healthy or can be eaten everyday, you are genuinely retarded. And if you think McDonald's is the source of all American fatness, you yourself MUST be fat. Diets work wonders.

 

^^Agreed......I love how on all the womens magazine covers you'll see a pic of some hot celeb with the words underneath " Diet secrets" lol

 

any other replies? anyone?

 

bueller? bueller?

 

i got you covered chek me out

www.prepaidlegal.com/hub/cwilliams88

 

That McDonalds case data changes my mind about as much as MikeK could have. You buy a cup of coffee, you place it BETWEEN YOUR KNEES in the car to mess with it and spill it on yourself. If that had been 100% fresh it would have been near BOILING. No matter what the company rules are etc, people need to stop blaming everyone else for their own actions. Those type cases are what makes it impossible to do anything without being sued, and why if that dumb lady could afford a good enough attorney she would have a VERY good chance of actually getting money due to her cats accident. People seem to think today that everyone else is responsible for keeping them safe from themselves. My fiance is an assitant teacher at a day care. They have a little girl who pitches fits to the point that she tears up everything in the room and attempts harm the other kids.. but they cant even make her sit alone in another room because of sue happy retards who sue everytime you look at their child the wrong way. It is disgusting how people have to walk on egg shells these days.

And as far as someone saying it was his fault about the cat... and "what if it would have been a person"...... my god people. So what if it would have been???? If a person ran full tilt straight into the side or front of your car... who could have done anything to avoid it? So I guess everyone should drive 10 mph on every road in case some idiot, animal, etc runs UNDER their car?

Sorry to go off on this, but the spineless people in todays world that have to be coddled and compensated for everything that happens to them is seriously causing issues with the next generation who are growing up so weak that every little thing causes them to freak out and sue or even worse, harm others. People need a good shot of GROW THE HELL UP AND GET A SPINE

Ok, I feel better now

 

And I agree with you, engifineer 100%. Roads are dangerous, no matter how you look at it. It's best to keep everything off of them, if at all possible. As I stated, and posted links to, automotive accidents are the third most deadly killer (of people) in the world. It's our own responsibility to keep our children (and pets) off of the road. That's why we have playgrounds.