[thechat] rebel without a clause

[aardvark]

> From: "deke " <web at master.gen.in.us>
[...]
> In the McDonald's case, the woman had permanent scarring and
> disfigurement, and $20,000 in out-of-pocket medical expenses, in
> addition to being bedridden and having to be cared for by her family
> for months. She asked for the $20,000, and McDonalds refused to pay a
> dime.

didn't she put the coffee between her legs and then start driving?

and am i the only one who assumes that all hot beverages handed
to me by someone other than me will be at around boiling
temperature?  seriously, why *wouldn't* one assume that?

> In the suit, McDonalds not only admitted that the coffee was unsafe,
> but that they knew the coffee was unsafe, since over 700 *other*
> people had asked them to pay medical bills from coffee burns, and that
> they were still at the time of the trial, serving coffee which could
> not be drunken.

i have to go back and look, but i don't recall them admitting it was
'unsafe'... i thought the wording was that they knew it was damn
hot, and that if poured in one's lap, would be unsafe...

drano poured in my throat is also unsafe...

700 other people just made the same mistake... 700 out of how
many people didn't guess that it was superheated?

> McDonalds got lucky. Someone *should* have seen the inside of a cell
> for criminal assault.

now that i don't agree with...

it's a buyer beware and common sense situation... if you didn't
make it yourself, assume it's at boiling temperature... take all
necessary precautions to not pour it on yourself...


--
Read the evolt.org case study
Usability: The Site Speaks for Itself
http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1904151035/evoltorg02-20
ISBN: 1904151035