OT - Sometimes It Pays To Be Stupid

Tue, Sep 4, 2007, 9:16pm (EDT-3) [email protected]
(Fred=A0the=A0Red=A0Shirt) posted this along with some other stuff.
A good and sometimes logical discussion may be had by posting to
misc.legal.moderated.

You sound like a lawyer.

A few weeks ago I burnt my hand with some hot coffee I had bought
at a fast food joint. My mistake, not the minimum wage drone. Much
pain, much redness, past 1st degree burn. Did I think sue? No, not
lately. I put my hand under the cold water for awhile. Then again.
And again. Pain finally subsided. Hand was bright red for over a week,
before starting to gradually fade in color. Then started to peel.
Would this have required $50,000 in medical costs? No. Should I have
tried suing? No, not in my world, I don't think I deserve money for
doing something like that. However, if it 'had' been someone from the
fast food joint at fault, the most I would have requested would have
been the actual medical cost. My son had surgery on an infected foot;
surgery, hospital time, intravenous medication, the whole shot, came to
around $25,000. $50,000 medical cost for a cup of coffee burn seems
excessive - but then, I'm not a soliciter.



JOAT
What is life without challenge and a constant stream of new
humiliations?
- Peter Egan

J T wrote:
$50,000 medical cost for a cup of coffee burn seems
> excessive - but then, I'm not a soliciter.
>

Although I am in agreement that such awards make but little sense, it
wasn't her foot or hand that got burned.

Where something is wholly or even just substantially my fault, I 'take
the hit'. Maybe I am out of step with this world ... but I really do
think that this is the right thing to do.

Stella could tell from her fingers that the coffee was hot. Coffee, by
its very nature, is normally served hot. Stella chose to put it between
her legs ... the serf in the window did not put the coffee there. Then
Stella, and no one else, spilled the stuff.

As a juror ... well, it's a good thing for Stella that I was not on that
jury.

In Ireland, the great cliffs of Moher stand some 800 feet above the sea.
There are no guardrails. Last year 6 people were blown over the edge
because they stood too close to it.

There has got to be some "Peter Principle" at work here. Something along
the lines of morons being able to harm themselves no matter how clearly
hazards are marked.

The thing is 800 feet in the air ... that's marking enough!
Coffee, even at 160 degrees, is hot. That's warning enough.

Bill

"John E." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> If this is in reference to the "3rd degree burns from the McDonalds' coffee"
> story, that particular story has been discredited for years now. Not only
> did no one receive any money, it is virtually impossible to receive 3rd
> degree burns, which means burns through the full epidermal layers of the
> skin resulting in charred flesh, from even scalding hot liquid.

Are you claming that this story is an urban myth? If so then a quick google search
shows quite a few articles that indicate that the lawsuit was real.


For instance here are a couple of references to the lawsuit in the NY Times:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9403E0D61F30F93AA2575BC0A962958260

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE6DE163CF931A25753C1A962958260&n=Top%2fNews%2fBusiness%2fCompanies%2fMcDonald%27s%20Corporation


Here are a few commentaries on the lawsuit:

http://www.atla.org/PressRoom/FACTS/frivolous/McdonaldsCoffeecase.aspx

http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Nov/1/129862.html

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

http://www.overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban_legends_and_stella_liebe.html

mea culpa....

A lawyer friend told me that that story was an urban myth, apparently he
should have done more research, as I should have.

I still find it hard to believe that coffee can cause full thickness burns
unless it was literally boiling and being poured continuously onto the
victims skin. Even being held against the skin by the clothing, it seems
very unlikely that a hot liquid could burn thru the epidermal layers of the
skin. Blisters, yeah, burned through? I don't think so.

Whatever the terms of the "secret" agreement between the woman and McDonalds
were, she didn't get rich suing them.

John E.


"Dan Coby" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "John E." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > If this is in reference to the "3rd degree burns from the McDonalds'
coffee"
> > story, that particular story has been discredited for years now. Not
only
> > did no one receive any money, it is virtually impossible to receive 3rd
> > degree burns, which means burns through the full epidermal layers of the
> > skin resulting in charred flesh, from even scalding hot liquid.
>
> Are you claming that this story is an urban myth? If so then a quick
google search
> shows quite a few articles that indicate that the lawsuit was real.
>
>
> For instance here are a couple of references to the lawsuit in the NY
Times:
>
>
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9403E0D61F30F93AA2575BC0A9629
58260
>
>
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE6DE163CF931A25753C1A9629
58260&n=Top%2fNews%2fBusiness%2fCompanies%2fMcDonald%27s%20Corporation
>
>
> Here are a few commentaries on the lawsuit:
>
> http://www.atla.org/PressRoom/FACTS/frivolous/McdonaldsCoffeecase.aspx
>
> http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Nov/1/129862.html
>
> http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
>
> http://www.overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban_legends_and_stella_liebe.html
>
>

"Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "BillinDetroit" wrote in message
>
>> In Ireland, the great cliffs of Moher stand some 800 feet above the sea.
>> There are no guardrails. Last year 6 people were blown over the edge
>> because they stood too close to it.
>
> Just nature's way of insuring they won't pass on the stupid gene.

No kidding. If those cliffs were in North America and was prone to be hit
by hurricanes we would see new TV reporters every few years.

Here ya go, If your interested here is a link
to the facts of the case. I am not sure why
someone would attempt to sound demeaning instead
of just posting a link to the facts. I am however
not the demeaning kind of guy so I will post the
link for you.
http://www.caoc.com/CA/index.cfm?event=showPage&pg=facts
Puff

"John E." <[email protected]> wrote in
message
news:[email protected]...
> mea culpa....
>
> A lawyer friend told me that that story was an
> urban myth, apparently he
> should have done more research, as I should
> have.
>
> I still find it hard to believe that coffee can
> cause full thickness burns
> unless it was literally boiling and being poured
> continuously onto the
> victims skin. Even being held against the skin
> by the clothing, it seems
> very unlikely that a hot liquid could burn thru
> the epidermal layers of the
> skin. Blisters, yeah, burned through? I don't
> think so.
>
> Whatever the terms of the "secret" agreement
> between the woman and McDonalds
> were, she didn't get rich suing them.
>
> John E.
>
>
> "Dan Coby" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "John E." <[email protected]> wrote in
>> message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > If this is in reference to the "3rd degree
>> > burns from the McDonalds'
> coffee"
>> > story, that particular story has been
>> > discredited for years now. Not
> only
>> > did no one receive any money, it is virtually
>> > impossible to receive 3rd
>> > degree burns, which means burns through the
>> > full epidermal layers of the
>> > skin resulting in charred flesh, from even
>> > scalding hot liquid.
>>
>> Are you claming that this story is an urban
>> myth? If so then a quick
> google search
>> shows quite a few articles that indicate that
>> the lawsuit was real.
>>
>>
>> For instance here are a couple of references to
>> the lawsuit in the NY
> Times:
>>
>>
> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9403E0D61F30F93AA2575BC0A9629
> 58260
>>
>>
> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE6DE163CF931A25753C1A9629
> 58260&n=Top%2fNews%2fBusiness%2fCompanies%2fMcDonald%27s%20Corporation
>>
>>
>> Here are a few commentaries on the lawsuit:
>>
>> http://www.atla.org/PressRoom/FACTS/frivolous/McdonaldsCoffeecase.aspx
>>
>> http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Nov/1/129862.html
>>
>> http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
>>
>> http://www.overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban_legends_and_stella_liebe.html
>>
>>
>
>

John E. wrote:
> If this is in reference to the "3rd degree burns from the McDonalds'
> coffee" story, that particular story has been discredited for years
> now. Not only did no one receive any money, it is virtually
> impossible to receive 3rd degree burns, which means burns through
> the
> full epidermal layers of the skin resulting in charred flesh, from
> even scalding hot liquid.

Discredited? Google "Stella Liebeck".

If you know with certainty that "no one received any money" then you
must be privy to information which is bound by a nondisclosure
agreement. The only thing that is known with certainty by anybody
other than Stella, McDonalds, the lawyers, the judge, the bank, and
the IRS is that there was a settlement for something less than
$680,000.

While it may be "virtually impossible to receive third degree burns .
. . from scalding hot liquid", according to the testimony of the
surgeon who performed the repairs on her, Stella Liebeck did in fact
somehow manage it. Now it may be that he was mistaken on that point,
however McDonalds' lawyers appear to have been unable to prove it in
court.

I don't know where you get the idea that "that story has been
discredited". It isn't something that somebody made up, it's a matter
of public record. If you call the Albuquerque courthouse they'll
probably be willing to sell you a copy of the transcript.

The only real point of contention is whether the temperature at which
the coffee was served was in fact excessive. According to published
standards and the opinion of numerous coffee experts (none of whom
appear to have been brought into the trial) it was not, but according
to a survey of establishments near the one in which the coffee was
purchased it was in excess of what a "reasonable man" would expect.



> John E.
>
> "BillinDetroit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> J T wrote:
>> $50,000 medical cost for a cup of coffee burn seems
>>> excessive - but then, I'm not a soliciter.
>>>
>>
>> Although I am in agreement that such awards make but little sense,
>> it
>> wasn't her foot or hand that got burned.
>>
>> Where something is wholly or even just substantially my fault, I
>> 'take the hit'. Maybe I am out of step with this world ... but I
>> really do think that this is the right thing to do.
>>
>> Stella could tell from her fingers that the coffee was hot. Coffee,
>> by its very nature, is normally served hot. Stella chose to put it
>> between her legs ... the serf in the window did not put the coffee
>> there. Then Stella, and no one else, spilled the stuff.
>>
>> As a juror ... well, it's a good thing for Stella that I was not on
>> that jury.
>>
>> In Ireland, the great cliffs of Moher stand some 800 feet above the
>> sea. There are no guardrails. Last year 6 people were blown over
>> the
>> edge because they stood too close to it.
>>
>> There has got to be some "Peter Principle" at work here. Something
>> along the lines of morons being able to harm themselves no matter
>> how clearly hazards are marked.
>>
>> The thing is 800 feet in the air ... that's marking enough!
>> Coffee, even at 160 degrees, is hot. That's warning enough.
>>
>> Bill

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

If this is in reference to the "3rd degree burns from the McDonalds' coffee"
story, that particular story has been discredited for years now. Not only
did no one receive any money, it is virtually impossible to receive 3rd
degree burns, which means burns through the full epidermal layers of the
skin resulting in charred flesh, from even scalding hot liquid.

John E.

"BillinDetroit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> J T wrote:
> $50,000 medical cost for a cup of coffee burn seems
> > excessive - but then, I'm not a soliciter.
> >
>
> Although I am in agreement that such awards make but little sense, it
> wasn't her foot or hand that got burned.
>
> Where something is wholly or even just substantially my fault, I 'take
> the hit'. Maybe I am out of step with this world ... but I really do
> think that this is the right thing to do.
>
> Stella could tell from her fingers that the coffee was hot. Coffee, by
> its very nature, is normally served hot. Stella chose to put it between
> her legs ... the serf in the window did not put the coffee there. Then
> Stella, and no one else, spilled the stuff.
>
> As a juror ... well, it's a good thing for Stella that I was not on that
> jury.
>
> In Ireland, the great cliffs of Moher stand some 800 feet above the sea.
> There are no guardrails. Last year 6 people were blown over the edge
> because they stood too close to it.
>
> There has got to be some "Peter Principle" at work here. Something along
> the lines of morons being able to harm themselves no matter how clearly
> hazards are marked.
>
> The thing is 800 feet in the air ... that's marking enough!
> Coffee, even at 160 degrees, is hot. That's warning enough.
>
> Bill

"BillinDetroit" wrote in message

> In Ireland, the great cliffs of Moher stand some 800 feet above the sea.
> There are no guardrails. Last year 6 people were blown over the edge
> because they stood too close to it.

Just nature's way of insuring they won't pass on the stupid gene.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 8/08/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

"Leon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> "BillinDetroit" wrote in message
>>
>>> In Ireland, the great cliffs of Moher stand some 800 feet above the sea.
>>> There are no guardrails. Last year 6 people were blown over the edge
>>> because they stood too close to it.
>>
>> Just nature's way of insuring they won't pass on the stupid gene.
>
> No kidding. If those cliffs were in North America and was prone to be hit
> by hurricanes we would see new TV reporters every few years.
>
If there is a herd anywhere that cries out for a good thinning, it would be
TV reporters.

Tue, Sep 4, 2007, 4:53pm (EDT+4) [email protected] (Charlie=A0Self)
doth posteth:
Hey, JOAT, better news here. <snip>

I think that was very courteous of them - saving taxpaper money on
a trial that is.



JOAT
What is life without challenge and a constant stream of new
humiliations?
- Peter Egan

On Sep 4, 7:02 pm, [email protected] (J T) wrote:
> Tue, Sep 4, 2007, 11:49am (EDT-3) [email protected] (Jeff) doth
> sayeth:
> You can figure all you want but that doesn't change the facts. Mike is
> right. The decision was handed down by a jury of peers. <snip>
> A few years ago, people flipped out when a woman was award millions of
> dollars after she was burned by McDonalds coffee. The final reward was
> considerably less. In the end she got 13,000.00 <snip>
>
> A jury of ignorant petty thieves, eh?
>
> Yeah, I recall. Any way you figure, she got a reward for bing
> stupid.

Not the way I figure it.

Unless you figure third degree burns and a medical bill in excess
of $50,000 is a reward.

> Ask for hot coffee, then sue when she does something stupid,
> and the coffe turns out to be hot.
>

Hot is not a binary condition.

--

FF

Tue, Sep 4, 2007, 11:49am (EDT-3) [email protected] (Jeff) doth
sayeth:
You can figure all you want but that doesn't change the facts. Mike is
right. The decision was handed down by a jury of peers. <snip>
A few years ago, people flipped out when a woman was award millions of
dollars after she was burned by McDonalds coffee. The final reward was
considerably less. In the end she got 13,000.00 <snip>

A jury of ignorant petty thieves, eh?

Yeah, I recall. Any way you figure, she got a reward for bing
stupid. Ask for hot coffee, then sue when she does something stupid,
and the coffe turns out to be hot.



JOAT
What is life without challenge and a constant stream of new
humiliations?
- Peter Egan

Go to http://www.stellaawards.com/stella.html You can read the story there.



"J T" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Tue, Sep 4, 2007, 11:49am (EDT-3) [email protected] (Jeff) doth
> sayeth:
> You can figure all you want but that doesn't change the facts. Mike is
> right. The decision was handed down by a jury of peers. <snip>
> A few years ago, people flipped out when a woman was award millions of
> dollars after she was burned by McDonalds coffee. The final reward was
> considerably less. In the end she got 13,000.00 <snip>
>
> A jury of ignorant petty thieves, eh?
>
> Yeah, I recall. Any way you figure, she got a reward for bing
> stupid. Ask for hot coffee, then sue when she does something stupid,
> and the coffe turns out to be hot.
>
>
>
> JOAT
> What is life without challenge and a constant stream of new
> humiliations?
> - Peter Egan
>

Allen Roy <[email protected]> wrote:
: Go to http://www.stellaawards.com/stella.html You can read the story there.



And here, with some pictures of what a burn like this can be like:


http://www.hurt911.org/mcdonalds.html




http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A429950
http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm



I continue to be amazed at how easily people come to the conclusion
that this was a frivolous lawsuit. It's like people enjoy McD's
hamburgers, and can't wait to defend them against some whiny old
lady who asked to have her medical costs covered (see last link).



-- Andy Barss

Andrew Barss wrote:
> Allen Roy <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Go to http://www.stellaawards.com/stella.html You can read the
>> story there.
>
>
>
> And here, with some pictures of what a burn like this can be like:
>
>
> http://www.hurt911.org/mcdonalds.html
>
>
>
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A429950
> http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm
>
>
>
> I continue to be amazed at how easily people come to the conclusion
> that this was a frivolous lawsuit. It's like people enjoy McD's
> hamburgers, and can't wait to defend them against some whiny old
> lady who asked to have her medical costs covered (see last link).

Oh, Christ, not this crap again. If it's below 200F coming out of the
filter then it's not being properly prepared according every expert on
the making of coffee that I've ever talked to and according to
American National Standards Institute published standards. McD did
what they were supposed to do and the Stupid Old Bat screwed the pooch
and the fact that a smart lawyer managed to bamboozle a jury into
agreeing with him doesn't change that.

And don't tell me about the "survey of local establishments". Just
because everybody else is serving lukewarm dog piss and calling it
"coffee" doesn't mean that that's the right way to do it and doesn't
mean that any outfit that follows the standards is doing wrong.

And don't tell me that Starbucks serves it cooler unless you're
talking about their drip coffee and straight espresso and not all the
fancy crap that is mostly 160F milk froth.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Tue, 04 Sep 2007 21:07:57 -0700, Fred the Red Shirt
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sep 4, 7:02 pm, [email protected] (J T) wrote:
>> Tue, Sep 4, 2007, 11:49am (EDT-3) [email protected] (Jeff) doth
>> sayeth:
>> You can figure all you want but that doesn't change the facts. Mike is
>> right. The decision was handed down by a jury of peers. <snip>
>> A few years ago, people flipped out when a woman was award millions of
>> dollars after she was burned by McDonalds coffee. The final reward was
>> considerably less. In the end she got 13,000.00 <snip>
>>
>> A jury of ignorant petty thieves, eh?
>>
>> Yeah, I recall. Any way you figure, she got a reward for bing
>> stupid.
>
>Not the way I figure it.
>
>Unless you figure third degree burns and a medical bill in excess
>of $50,000 is a reward.
>
>> Ask for hot coffee, then sue when she does something stupid,
>> and the coffe turns out to be hot.
>>
>
>Hot is not a binary condition.

It's a REWARD for being stupid! Why should the world pay for other
peoples stupidity!

Break the law, get burned, TOUGH! Take the consequences!

Just like New Orleans, the nation is going to pay again and again for
people that live below sea level to get a free pass when reason says
move to higher ground!! DUH pay the relocation once!
In the rest of the country people can't get a building permit or
mortgage money for property in the "100 year flood plane".