On 20/07/2013 14:31, Phil L wrote:
> It's like the, 'Warning - hot' on the side of a MacDonalds coffee cup, this
> has to be there to prevent braindead knuckledragging fuckwits pouring a full
> cup of near-boiling liquid down their throats, if there were no warnings,
> people would be doing all of the above because the majority of them are as
> intelligent as a bucket of cold shit.
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, also known as the McDonald's coffee
case and the hot coffee lawsuit, was a 1994 product liability lawsuit
that became a flashpoint in the debate in the United States over tort
reform. A New Mexico civil jury awarded $2.86 million to plaintiff
Stella Liebeck who had suffered third-degree burns in her pelvic region
when she accidentally spilled hot coffee in her lap after purchasing it
from a McDonald's restaurant. Liebeck was hospitalized for eight days
while she underwent skin grafting, followed by two years of medical
treatment.
Liebeck's attorneys argued that at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C), McDonald's
coffee was defective, claiming it was too hot and more likely to cause
serious injury than coffee served at any other establishment. McDonald's
had refused several prior opportunities to settle for less than what the
jury ultimately awarded. The jury damages included $160,000[3] to cover
medical expenses and compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive
damages. The trial judge reduced the final verdict to $640,000, and the
parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk