Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
Jay Honeck wrote:
I don't have an opinion one way or the other. Those were the facts
of the case.
THANK YOU for sharing the facts of the case. They are very
enlightening.

None of the facts, IMHO, pin ANY blame on the folks who brewed the
coffee. McDonald's was wronged, plain and simple.

How about you respond as the defendant to these.

6. In discovery, it was disclosd that McD had over 700 previous claims
by people burned in a ten year period just before this incident,
including 3rd degree burns. This establishd McD's prior knowledge of
the extent and nature of the hazard.

7. McD also said that it it intentionally held th temp between 180
and 190 F. When

11. McD admitted that it knew that any food substance served at or
above 140 F is a burn hazard, and that at the temp they served it, it
was not fit for human consumption.

12. They also admitted that they knew burns would occur, but had
decided to keep the temp at 185 anyway.

15. McD told the jury that customers buy coffee on their way to work,
intending to drink it there. However, their own research was brought
out that showed that customers intend to consume the coffee
immediately while driving.

Still nothing that makes Mickey D's liable in my opinion. As I posted
earlier, coffee is considered best brewed at about 200 degrees F and
"held" at 170 or above. It sounds like McDonald's was following sound
coffee brewing and serving practice.

Putting a cup of hot liquid between your legs is negligent and just
asking for trouble. I can see a 3 year-old not knowing this, but a 79
year-old is without excuse.

I suspect that ordinary matches burn a lot more than 700 people in a
typical decade. I suspect that makers of matches have prior knowledge
of this hazard. Does this make a match manufacturer liable for every
idiot who burns themselves with a match?

Matt