RlCO 0 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Warning: Hot Coffee If that's referring to the infamous coffee burn case, I feel I should point out the real facts of that case.... The woman was given coffee which was heated to over 190 degrees F (that's 88 degrees C) which is MUCH higher than the suggested safe temperature for serving a beverage (but was McDonald's standard temperature in their manual) When she was given the coffee and it spilled, she suffered 3rd degree burns on her thighs and genitals, resulting in the need for several skin grafts from her back which cost upwards of $20,000. This was not the first instance of this injury; McDonalds had had warning of the danger of serving superheated coffee yet continued to direct its employees to do so. The woman sued for ONLY the medical expenses, and the other damages were PUNITIVE. The point of punitive damages is to provide a deterrent for repeated offenses. The amount required will differ with defendants. If Gemmill beats me up, a punitive award would be less than if Kieron Dyer beat me up. It's not because Gemmill is less of a twat, it's because a fine of $5,000 is significant to Gemmill, but pocket change to Dyer. I'm not commenting on the the case in the first post, however, as I don't know the circumstances of it as yet. How hot is a cup of coffee when you pour it from a freshly boiled kettle at home? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zathras 234 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 (edited) Warning: Hot Coffee If that's referring to the infamous coffee burn case, I feel I should point out the real facts of that case.... The woman was given coffee which was heated to over 190 degrees F (that's 88 degrees C) which is MUCH higher than the suggested safe temperature for serving a beverage (but was McDonald's standard temperature in their manual) When she was given the coffee and it spilled, she suffered 3rd degree burns on her thighs and genitals, resulting in the need for several skin grafts from her back which cost upwards of $20,000. This was not the first instance of this injury; McDonalds had had warning of the danger of serving superheated coffee yet continued to direct its employees to do so. The woman sued for ONLY the medical expenses, and the other damages were PUNITIVE. The point of punitive damages is to provide a deterrent for repeated offenses. The amount required will differ with defendants. If Gemmill beats me up, a punitive award would be less than if Kieron Dyer beat me up. It's not because Gemmill is less of a twat, it's because a fine of $5,000 is significant to Gemmill, but pocket change to Dyer. I'm not commenting on the the case in the first post, however, as I don't know the circumstances of it as yet. How hot is a cup of coffee when you pour it from a freshly boiled kettle at home? Coffee should be *brewed* at approximately 90 degrees C. It should be SERVED at about 65-75 degrees C. One serving coffee at home is not a. Serving it in a paper cup b. Sitting in a car c. unaware that it is being served at a temperature at which it is unsafe to drink because it would burn your esophagus. Edited November 6, 2007 by Zathras Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Warning: Hot Coffee If that's referring to the infamous coffee burn case, I feel I should point out the real facts of that case.... The woman was given coffee which was heated to over 190 degrees F (that's 88 degrees C) which is MUCH higher than the suggested safe temperature for serving a beverage (but was McDonald's standard temperature in their manual) When she was given the coffee and it spilled, she suffered 3rd degree burns on her thighs and genitals, resulting in the need for several skin grafts from her back which cost upwards of $20,000. This was not the first instance of this injury; McDonalds had had warning of the danger of serving superheated coffee yet continued to direct its employees to do so. The woman sued for ONLY the medical expenses, and the other damages were PUNITIVE. The point of punitive damages is to provide a deterrent for repeated offenses. The amount required will differ with defendants. If Gemmill beats me up, a punitive award would be less than if Kieron Dyer beat me up. It's not because Gemmill is less of a twat, it's because a fine of $5,000 is significant to Gemmill, but pocket change to Dyer. I'm not commenting on the the case in the first post, however, as I don't know the circumstances of it as yet. How hot is a cup of coffee when you pour it from a freshly boiled kettle at home? Coffee should be *brewed* at approximately 90 degrees C. It should be SERVED at about 65-75 degrees C. One serving coffee at home is not a. Serving it in a paper cup b. Sitting in a car c. unaware that it is being served at a temperature at which it is unsafe to drink because it would burn your esophagus. Agree with points a and b, but what has c got to do with it? That's just common sense to work out how hot it is before drinking it. Are you saying that if she was aware how hot it was, she wouldn't have bothered spilling it in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zathras 234 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Warning: Hot Coffee If that's referring to the infamous coffee burn case, I feel I should point out the real facts of that case.... The woman was given coffee which was heated to over 190 degrees F (that's 88 degrees C) which is MUCH higher than the suggested safe temperature for serving a beverage (but was McDonald's standard temperature in their manual) When she was given the coffee and it spilled, she suffered 3rd degree burns on her thighs and genitals, resulting in the need for several skin grafts from her back which cost upwards of $20,000. This was not the first instance of this injury; McDonalds had had warning of the danger of serving superheated coffee yet continued to direct its employees to do so. The woman sued for ONLY the medical expenses, and the other damages were PUNITIVE. The point of punitive damages is to provide a deterrent for repeated offenses. The amount required will differ with defendants. If Gemmill beats me up, a punitive award would be less than if Kieron Dyer beat me up. It's not because Gemmill is less of a twat, it's because a fine of $5,000 is significant to Gemmill, but pocket change to Dyer. I'm not commenting on the the case in the first post, however, as I don't know the circumstances of it as yet. How hot is a cup of coffee when you pour it from a freshly boiled kettle at home? Coffee should be *brewed* at approximately 90 degrees C. It should be SERVED at about 65-75 degrees C. One serving coffee at home is not a. Serving it in a paper cup b. Sitting in a car c. unaware that it is being served at a temperature at which it is unsafe to drink because it would burn your esophagus. Agree with points a and b, but what has c got to do with it? That's just common sense to work out how hot it is before drinking it. Are you saying that if she was aware how hot it was, she wouldn't have bothered spilling it in the first place? If she knew that it was that hot, she would likely have been more careful with the cup; for instance not placing it between her legs. If you know it is too hot to drink you're more careful with a drink than if you don't know the temperature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Warning: Hot Coffee If that's referring to the infamous coffee burn case, I feel I should point out the real facts of that case.... The woman was given coffee which was heated to over 190 degrees F (that's 88 degrees C) which is MUCH higher than the suggested safe temperature for serving a beverage (but was McDonald's standard temperature in their manual) When she was given the coffee and it spilled, she suffered 3rd degree burns on her thighs and genitals, resulting in the need for several skin grafts from her back which cost upwards of $20,000. This was not the first instance of this injury; McDonalds had had warning of the danger of serving superheated coffee yet continued to direct its employees to do so. The woman sued for ONLY the medical expenses, and the other damages were PUNITIVE. The point of punitive damages is to provide a deterrent for repeated offenses. The amount required will differ with defendants. If Gemmill beats me up, a punitive award would be less than if Kieron Dyer beat me up. It's not because Gemmill is less of a twat, it's because a fine of $5,000 is significant to Gemmill, but pocket change to Dyer. I'm not commenting on the the case in the first post, however, as I don't know the circumstances of it as yet. How hot is a cup of coffee when you pour it from a freshly boiled kettle at home? Coffee should be *brewed* at approximately 90 degrees C. It should be SERVED at about 65-75 degrees C. One serving coffee at home is not a. Serving it in a paper cup b. Sitting in a car c. unaware that it is being served at a temperature at which it is unsafe to drink because it would burn your esophagus. Agree with points a and b, but what has c got to do with it? That's just common sense to work out how hot it is before drinking it. Are you saying that if she was aware how hot it was, she wouldn't have bothered spilling it in the first place? If she knew that it was that hot, she would likely have been more careful with the cup; for instance not placing it between her legs. If you know it is too hot to drink you're more careful with a drink than if you don't know the temperature. You'd think she'd know it was too hot, because of point a. More fool her tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Warning: Hot Coffee If that's referring to the infamous coffee burn case, I feel I should point out the real facts of that case.... The woman was given coffee which was heated to over 190 degrees F (that's 88 degrees C) which is MUCH higher than the suggested safe temperature for serving a beverage (but was McDonald's standard temperature in their manual) When she was given the coffee and it spilled, she suffered 3rd degree burns on her thighs and genitals, resulting in the need for several skin grafts from her back which cost upwards of $20,000. This was not the first instance of this injury; McDonalds had had warning of the danger of serving superheated coffee yet continued to direct its employees to do so. The woman sued for ONLY the medical expenses, and the other damages were PUNITIVE. The point of punitive damages is to provide a deterrent for repeated offenses. The amount required will differ with defendants. If Gemmill beats me up, a punitive award would be less than if Kieron Dyer beat me up. It's not because Gemmill is less of a twat, it's because a fine of $5,000 is significant to Gemmill, but pocket change to Dyer. I'm not commenting on the the case in the first post, however, as I don't know the circumstances of it as yet. How hot is a cup of coffee when you pour it from a freshly boiled kettle at home? Coffee should be *brewed* at approximately 90 degrees C. It should be SERVED at about 65-75 degrees C. One serving coffee at home is not a. Serving it in a paper cup b. Sitting in a car c. unaware that it is being served at a temperature at which it is unsafe to drink because it would burn your esophagus. Agree with points a and b, but what has c got to do with it? That's just common sense to work out how hot it is before drinking it. Are you saying that if she was aware how hot it was, she wouldn't have bothered spilling it in the first place? If she knew that it was that hot, she would likely have been more careful with the cup; for instance not placing it between her legs. If you know it is too hot to drink you're more careful with a drink than if you don't know the temperature. Maybe she wasn't used to having a hot object between her legs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RlCO 0 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 She got in a car and put a cup of coffee between her legs? Am I missing something here? How is she not stupid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zathras 234 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 (edited) She got in a car and put a cup of coffee between her legs? Am I missing something here? How is she not stupid? You don't have Drive-Thrus in Britain? You don't think that McDonalds has a duty to tell someone that they're being handed a substance that will cause $20,000 worth of personal injuries on contact that it is dangerous? Edited November 6, 2007 by Zathras Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 She got in a car and put a cup of coffee between her legs? Am I missing something here? How is she not stupid? You don't have Drive-Thrus in Britain? You don't think that McDonalds has a duty to tell someone that they're being handed a substance that will cause $20,000 worth of personal injuries on contact that it is dangerous? In the same way that cigarette manufacturers have to put "smoking kills" on their boxes? "Here's your coffee maam. Now be sure not to spill it on your genitals as it might just burn..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zathras 234 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 She got in a car and put a cup of coffee between her legs? Am I missing something here? How is she not stupid? You don't have Drive-Thrus in Britain? You don't think that McDonalds has a duty to tell someone that they're being handed a substance that will cause $20,000 worth of personal injuries on contact that it is dangerous? In the same way that cigarette manufacturers have to put "smoking kills" on their boxes? "Here's your coffee maam. Now be sure not to spill it on your genitals as it might just burn..." There is a difference in degrees. One should reasonably expect coffee served to cause 1st degree burns and possibly 2nd degree burns, but it is patently unreasonable to expect coffee to cause 3rd degree burns. Had she suffered less severe injuries then there wouldn't be a cause of action because McDonalds could easily plead contributory negligence; she should expect such smaller injuries. It was not reasonable to require her to expect that kind of damage from a cup of coffee, whereas it was perfectly reasonable for McDonald's to expect such injuries were possible because they were aware of the true nature of the coffee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RlCO 0 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 She got in a car and put a cup of coffee between her legs? Am I missing something here? How is she not stupid? You don't have Drive-Thrus in Britain? You don't think that McDonalds has a duty to tell someone that they're being handed a substance that will cause $20,000 worth of personal injuries on contact that it is dangerous? Not when it's coffee no. The only thing I have sympathy with her about (and I'm pushing it here) is that certain of the paper cup types are extremely deceptive, i.e. you can't tell the temperature because they are such good insulators, however, I just come back to the whole 'sticking a flexible cup of hot coffee between your legs while driving' issue. And you can't do anything over here in a car that will distract your attention from the road, pretty sure that would include transporting coffee between your legs. It's a pity companies can't counter sue on grounds of not having any common sense, hence every little thing is coming down to safe procedure and operating instructions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zathras 234 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 (edited) She got in a car and put a cup of coffee between her legs? Am I missing something here? How is she not stupid? You don't have Drive-Thrus in Britain? You don't think that McDonalds has a duty to tell someone that they're being handed a substance that will cause $20,000 worth of personal injuries on contact that it is dangerous? Not when it's coffee no. The only thing I have sympathy with her about (and I'm pushing it here) is that certain of the paper cup types are extremely deceptive, i.e. you can't tell the temperature because they are such good insulators, however, I just come back to the whole 'sticking a flexible cup of hot coffee between your legs while driving' issue. And you can't do anything over here in a car that will distract your attention from the road, pretty sure that would include transporting coffee between your legs. It's a pity companies can't counter sue on grounds of not having any common sense, hence every little thing is coming down to safe procedure and operating instructions. As I said above, it's a question of degrees of expeectation. She could expect some burns, but it is unreasonable to require her to expect and protect against such a severe burn from a substance that most people do not have contact with at such temperatures. Edit: Oh, and she was the passenger in the car. Edited November 6, 2007 by Zathras Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 She got in a car and put a cup of coffee between her legs? Am I missing something here? How is she not stupid? You don't have Drive-Thrus in Britain? You don't think that McDonalds has a duty to tell someone that they're being handed a substance that will cause $20,000 worth of personal injuries on contact that it is dangerous? Not when it's coffee no. The only thing I have sympathy with her about (and I'm pushing it here) is that certain of the paper cup types are extremely deceptive, i.e. you can't tell the temperature because they are such good insulators, however, I just come back to the whole 'sticking a flexible cup of hot coffee between your legs while driving' issue. And you can't do anything over here in a car that will distract your attention from the road, pretty sure that would include transporting coffee between your legs. It's a pity companies can't counter sue on grounds of not having any common sense, hence every little thing is coming down to safe procedure and operating instructions. As I said above, it's a question of degrees of expeectation. She could expect some burns, but it is unreasonable to require her to expect and protect against such a severe burn from a substance that most people do not have contact with at such temperatures. Edit: Oh, and she was the passenger in the car. Busy doing her makeup and talking on the phone at the same time I expect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 She got in a car and put a cup of coffee between her legs? Am I missing something here? How is she not stupid? You don't have Drive-Thrus in Britain? You don't think that McDonalds has a duty to tell someone that they're being handed a substance that will cause $20,000 worth of personal injuries on contact that it is dangerous? Not when it's coffee no. The only thing I have sympathy with her about (and I'm pushing it here) is that certain of the paper cup types are extremely deceptive, i.e. you can't tell the temperature because they are such good insulators, however, I just come back to the whole 'sticking a flexible cup of hot coffee between your legs while driving' issue. And you can't do anything over here in a car that will distract your attention from the road, pretty sure that would include transporting coffee between your legs. It's a pity companies can't counter sue on grounds of not having any common sense, hence every little thing is coming down to safe procedure and operating instructions. As I said above, it's a question of degrees of expeectation. She could expect some burns, but it is unreasonable to require her to expect and protect against such a severe burn from a substance that most people do not have contact with at such temperatures. Edit: Oh, and she was the passenger in the car. She sounds rather special tbh. I'm sure out of the millions of cups of coffee sold by McDonalds with no incident taking place, there was no real inclination for them to alter their serving policy. Not until some idiot didn't use the cup holder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 2929 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 I thought all vehicles in 'merica came with cup holders tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zathras 234 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 She got in a car and put a cup of coffee between her legs? Am I missing something here? How is she not stupid? You don't have Drive-Thrus in Britain? You don't think that McDonalds has a duty to tell someone that they're being handed a substance that will cause $20,000 worth of personal injuries on contact that it is dangerous? Not when it's coffee no. The only thing I have sympathy with her about (and I'm pushing it here) is that certain of the paper cup types are extremely deceptive, i.e. you can't tell the temperature because they are such good insulators, however, I just come back to the whole 'sticking a flexible cup of hot coffee between your legs while driving' issue. And you can't do anything over here in a car that will distract your attention from the road, pretty sure that would include transporting coffee between your legs. It's a pity companies can't counter sue on grounds of not having any common sense, hence every little thing is coming down to safe procedure and operating instructions. As I said above, it's a question of degrees of expeectation. She could expect some burns, but it is unreasonable to require her to expect and protect against such a severe burn from a substance that most people do not have contact with at such temperatures. Edit: Oh, and she was the passenger in the car. She sounds rather special tbh. I'm sure out of the millions of cups of coffee sold by McDonalds with no incident taking place, there was no real inclination for them to alter their serving policy. Not until some idiot didn't use the cup holder. The point is (and this is why there was such a large punitive damage award) that there had been several hundred similar incidents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now