Cessna sued for skydiving accident.

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 12:49:09 -0800 (PST), Jay Honeck
wrote:

This is a perfect example. Upon closer examination, the McDonalds case
does have merit. But people don't examine it more closely, because of
their jaundiced eye.

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?


The woman was seriously injured and spent 8 days in hospital getting
skin grafts. That McD's had been selling super hot coffee for some time
and had previous warnings. This case did have merit and I believe the
woman did not get rich from it either.




randall g =%^) PPASEL+Night 1974 Cardinal RG
http://www.telemark.net/randallg
Lots of aerial photographs of British Columbia at:
http://www.telemark.net/randallg/photos.htm
Vancouver's famous Kat Kam: http://www.katkam.ca

"randall g" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 12:49:09 -0800 (PST), Jay Honeck
wrote:

This is a perfect example. Upon closer examination, the McDonalds case
does have merit. But people don't examine it more closely, because of
their jaundiced eye.

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?


The woman was seriously injured and spent 8 days in hospital getting
skin grafts. That McD's had been selling super hot coffee for some time
and had previous warnings.

They had a few requests, not warning, after selling tens of millions of
cups.

This case did have merit and I believe the
woman did not get rich from it either.


I guess someone being stupid has merit for you. That's appropriate:
birds-of-a-feather and all that.

"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in message
...

They had a few requests, not warning, after selling tens of millions of
cups.


I heard somehwhere, I have no idea where, so cannot backup this up, that
Mickey D's had their own 'consultants' tell them their coffee was being
served too hot.

I don't buy coffee there. It's too damn hot. (begin a cheap *******, I
usually make my own anyway)

"Yes - I have a name" wrote in news:3PZ4j.4090
$6k1.3271@trndny02:

"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in message
...

They had a few requests, not warning, after selling tens of millions of
cups.


I heard somehwhere, I have no idea where, so cannot backup this up, that
Mickey D's had their own 'consultants' tell them their coffee was being
served too hot.

I don't buy coffee there. It's too damn hot.


I wouldn't buy it there for the simple reason it's ****ing McDonalds!


Bertie

"Yes - I have a name" wrote in message
news:3PZ4j.4090$6k1.3271@trndny02...
"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in message
...

They had a few requests, not warning, after selling tens of millions of
cups.


I heard somehwhere, I have no idea where, so cannot backup this up, that
Mickey D's had their own 'consultants' tell them their coffee was being
served too hot.

And when they tired lowering the temp, they had customer complaints that it
got cold too fast.

I don't buy coffee there. It's too damn hot. (begin a cheap *******, I
usually make my own anyway)

I don't buy anything at McD's and haven't for twenty years.

Not only is the food crap, but I don't want to subsidize Joan Croc, a far
out, goofy leftist.

"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in
:


"Yes - I have a name" wrote in message
news:3PZ4j.4090$6k1.3271@trndny02...
"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in message
...

They had a few requests, not warning, after selling tens of millions
of cups.


I heard somehwhere, I have no idea where, so cannot backup this up,
that Mickey D's had their own 'consultants' tell them their coffee
was being served too hot.

And when they tired lowering the temp, they had customer complaints
that it got cold too fast.

I don't buy coffee there. It's too damn hot. (begin a cheap *******,
I usually make my own anyway)

I don't buy anything at McD's and haven't for twenty years.

Not only is the food crap, but I don't want to subsidize Joan Croc, a
far out, goofy leftist.




She must be relling from the financial blow.



Bertie

Yes - I have a name wrote:
"Matt W. Barrow" wrote in message
...

They had a few requests, not warning, after selling tens of millions of
cups.


I heard somehwhere, I have no idea where, so cannot backup this up, that
Mickey D's had their own 'consultants' tell them their coffee was being
served too hot.

I don't buy coffee there. It's too damn hot. (begin a cheap *******, I
usually make my own anyway)

Well, a simple Google search shows that the ideal brewing temperature
for coffee is 200 degrees F give or take 5 degrees and the "holding"
temperature for coffee is 175 or higher. 175 will give you a wicked
burn and freshly brewed coffee could easily be 200 degrees. I
personally think McDonald's got shafted in this case and I've heard the
arguments on both sides MANY times.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search

To me the degree of the injury was simply not relevant. Had the woman
not done something patently stupid, she would have had NO injury at all.
It isn't McDonald's fault that she did something stupid. And it isn't
Cessna's fault if a pilot does something stupid. I'm not saying that is
the case in this incident and we'll have to wait for the NTSB to give us
an idea where the stupidity lies.

Matt

On Dec 3, 11:46 am, randall g wrote:
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 12:49:09 -0800 (PST), Jay Honeck
wrote:

This is a perfect example. Upon closer examination, the McDonalds case
does have merit. But people don't examine it more closely, because of
their jaundiced eye.

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?

The woman was seriously injured and spent 8 days in hospital getting
skin grafts. That McD's had been selling super hot coffee for some time
and had previous warnings. This case did have merit and I believe the
woman did not get rich from it either.

randall g =%^) PPASEL+Night 1974 Cardinal RGhttp://www.telemark.net/randallg
Lots of aerial photographs of British Columbia at:http://www.telemark.net/randallg/photos.htm
Vancouver's famous Kat Kam:http://www.katkam.ca

This was a fun case to study in law class. It was a classic example of
how to perfectly lose a case. There is nothing McD's could have done
better to lose that case. When the lady first got hurt, she wrote a
letter to McD's explaining what happened and asking for her medical
bills to be covered. McD's corporate office wrote back a very, very
nasty letter to her telling her "duh coffee is hot" and expressing
*NO* sympathy. If they had said "Sorry you were hurt, its not our
policy to pay for damages you incurred" or even just ignored her that
would be the end of it.
The lady then showed the nasty letter to her neighbor who showed it to
her attorney son. Her son took up the case soley based on the letter
McD's set back.
So the case goes to trial and they interview the McD's manager. The
attorney had just finished showing the jury images of the deformed
lady's "areas" and had just had shown all the surgeries the woman had
had to repair her damage. The McD's manager got up there and told the
jury "Sorry, coffee is not, get over it". Many scholars believe if he
had said "Damn that looks bad, I feel sorry for her, but our coffee is
hot", then the jury would have found in favor of McD's. In addition
the temp of the coffee was hotter than McD's policy.
-Robert

Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Dec 3, 11:46 am, randall g wrote:
On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 12:49:09 -0800 (PST), Jay Honeck
wrote:

This is a perfect example. Upon closer examination, the McDonalds case
does have merit. But people don't examine it more closely, because of
their jaundiced eye.
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?
The woman was seriously injured and spent 8 days in hospital getting
skin grafts. That McD's had been selling super hot coffee for some time
and had previous warnings. This case did have merit and I believe the
woman did not get rich from it either.

randall g =%^) PPASEL+Night 1974 Cardinal RGhttp://www.telemark.net/randallg
Lots of aerial photographs of British Columbia at:http://www.telemark.net/randallg/photos.htm
Vancouver's famous Kat Kam:http://www.katkam.ca

This was a fun case to study in law class. It was a classic example of
how to perfectly lose a case. There is nothing McD's could have done
better to lose that case. When the lady first got hurt, she wrote a
letter to McD's explaining what happened and asking for her medical
bills to be covered. McD's corporate office wrote back a very, very
nasty letter to her telling her "duh coffee is hot" and expressing
*NO* sympathy. If they had said "Sorry you were hurt, its not our
policy to pay for damages you incurred" or even just ignored her that
would be the end of it.
The lady then showed the nasty letter to her neighbor who showed it to
her attorney son. Her son took up the case soley based on the letter
McD's set back.
So the case goes to trial and they interview the McD's manager. The
attorney had just finished showing the jury images of the deformed
lady's "areas" and had just had shown all the surgeries the woman had
had to repair her damage. The McD's manager got up there and told the
jury "Sorry, coffee is not, get over it". Many scholars believe if he
had said "Damn that looks bad, I feel sorry for her, but our coffee is
hot", then the jury would have found in favor of McD's. In addition
the temp of the coffee was hotter than McD's policy.
-Robert

So you liability for something is based on how you respond to the
complaint? That is a very stupid principle. What if McDonald's had
told the truth and said we are sorry you are stupid, but being stupid is
often painful? If I walk in front of a semi on the interstate that will
hurt also. Is it the truck driver's fault or the truck maker's fault
that I got hurt?

Matt

On Dec 3, 3:16 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:

So you liability for something is based on how you respond to the
complaint? That is a very stupid principle. What if McDonald's had
told the truth and said we are sorry you are stupid, but being stupid is
often painful? If I walk in front of a semi on the interstate that will
hurt also. Is it the truck driver's fault or the truck maker's fault
that I got hurt?

Yes. If remember anything from law school it was that anytime you go
to a jury trial the results will be unpredictable. They did establish
that McD's had a policy for what temp the coffee should be and that
the manager of this location did know it was higher than that, so you
could argue that the jury was interested in that too. However, you
have to remember that this was a case of someone being disfigured.
Jurys can be very emotional about that type of stuff.

-Robert