On Dec 2, 6:32 pm, "Maxwell" wrote:
"Tom Conner" wrote in message

...







"Ron Wanttaja" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 13:05:16 -0800 (PST), Jay Honeck
wrote:

I've heard you say this before, Jose, but never understood it. In
your opinion, what merit was there in a woman winning a lawsuit
against McDonalds because she burned herself on hot coffee?

Did you see the extent of the burns? There is hot and there is EFFING
HOT!

Apparently they had the temperature cranked way above scalding
levels.

Um, well, okay -- but isn't coffee *supposed* to be "effing hot"?

Mickey D's coffee caused third-degree burns. The argument was that was
*too*
effing hot.

I would be interested in knowing how much insulation the cup provided. If
it was paper then it couldn't have been to hot. If it was made of Shuttle
re-entry tiles then it probably was to hot.

Regardless of her initial award, does anyone know how much she actually
collected after appeal issues and such. I heard it was much less, but don't
recall the numbers. Maybe $200k.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

It was settled for $600,000.