Is McDonalds Selectively Killing Americans?

[Regnad Kcin]

Luke,

Indeed. But she got $2.9 million.

How is this not run-away justice?

From the link provided earlier:

The jury found that Ms. Liebeck suffered $200,000 in compensatory damages for her medical costs and disability. The award was reduced to $160,000 since the jury determined that 20 percent of the fault for the injury belonged with Ms. Liebeck for spilling the coffee.[12]

Based on its finding that McDonald’s had engaged in willful, reckless, malicious or wanton conduct, the jury then awarded $2.7 million in punitive damages; essential to the size of the award was the fact that at the time McDonald’s made $1.35 million in coffee sales daily.[13]

Since the purposes of awarding punitive damages are to punish the person or company doing the wrongful act and to discourage him and others from similar conduct in the future, the degree of punishment or deterrence resulting from a judgment is in proportion to the wealth of the guilty person.[14]Punitive damages are supposed to be large enough to send a message to the wrongdoer; limited punitive awards when applied to wealthy corporations, means the signal they are designed to send will not be heard. The trial court refused to grant McDonald’s a retrial, finding that its behavior was “callous.” The judge, however, announced in open court a few days after the trial that he would reduce the punitive damages award to $480,000.[15] Both sides appealed the decision.

Bolding mine.

I thought you said you read the linked article.

 

[hgc]

I'm asking: What is runaway justice?

Heavens to Betsy!!! Did you lose your skeptic's manual?! You used the term. How about you define it and provide evidence for your claim?

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Regnad:

Well, I can see where they are coming from. I used to have the same opinion of the case as CFL. However, after learning more of the details (such as the degree of tmeperature difference, the extent of the injuries caused, etc), I changed my mind...

Yes.

I believe this matter to be a wonderful illustration of how people will often leap to conclusions when they think (if not believe) they have all the details at hand, moreover making the assumption (often automatically) that their level of intelligence, and precision of thought process, serves them equally in various matters. Whew!

Woman spills coffee, burns herself, and sues for millions?! That's so wrong!

Indeed.

 

[CFLarsen]

I thought you said you read the linked article.

I did. The jury awarded her $2.9 mil. The judge would reduce it, which resulted in appeals from both sides:

Before the appeals could be heard the parties reached an out-of-court agreement for an undisclosed amount of money. As part of this settlement, McDonald’s demanded that no one could release the details of the case.[16]

 

[CFLarsen]

Heavens to Betsy!!! Did you lose your skeptic's manual?! You used the term. How about you define it and provide evidence for your claim?

What "claim"? I stated an opinion: That this is a case of runaway justice. You disagree? Let's hear why.

Contribute to the discussion. Don't just sit on the sideline, point fingers and yell "FOUL!"

 

[CFLarsen]

There's no set temperature, that I know of. However, as others have stated, the industry standard is about 165 degrees.

Was this decided before or after this trial?

I can give some other figures, as well. For example,t eh little coffee cup hotplates you can buy to keep your coffee warm run at about 120 degrees, max, which is considered drinkable temperature.

That's for keeping it warm. Not brewing it.

Notice all are ten degrees or more below McDonald's serving temperature.

Not correct. They sell coffee at 180 to 190 F.

What you're telling me, here (and correct me if I'm wrong), is that the customer should expect any coffee served them to be hot enough to cause third degree burns? That's a bit extreme.

No. I am saying that the customer should expect any hot coffee served to them to be hot enough to be hot enough for them to have hot coffee.

Claus, you're falling into an Either-Or fallacy here. This is not a clear-cut her fault-or-their fault issue. Was she negligent for putitng the coffee in her lap? Yes, she was. However, McDonald's served their coffee at a much higher level than the industry standard, had had many issues arise before of injury due to thier coffee, and had consistantly refused to either changed thier practice or provide any sort of warning or notice.

Yet, you can get 3rd degree burns from coffee served at industry standard as well. Why isn't the whole industry sued, then?

It is not reasonable to expect third degree burns from coffee. That's the issue here (as I see it). If she had opened the coffee cup and poured it over her head, McDonald's shoudl still be responsible for part of the incident, due to the extreme temperature.

That's insane. Intent means nothing? If you try to commit suicide by shooting yourself, can you sue the gun manufacturer (provided you are not succesful)?

Try this from http://www.vanfirm.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm:

"At that point, Mr. Goens and the other jurors knew only the basic facts: that two years earlier, Stella Liebeck had bought a 49-cent cup of coffee at the drive-in window of an Albuquerque McDonald's, and while removing the lid to add cream and sugar had spilled it, causing third-degree burns of the groin, inner thighs and buttocks. Her suit, filed in state court in Albuquerque, claimed the coffee was "defective" because it was so hot.

What the jury didn't realize initially was the severity of her burns. Told during the trial of Mrs. Liebeck's seven days in the hospital and her skin grafts, and shown gruesome photographs, jurors began taking the matter more seriously. "It made me come home and tell my wife and daughters don't drink coffee in the car, at least not hot," says juror Jack Elliott.

Well, duh! Some people are really stupid. There's no getting around that fact.

Even more eye-opening was the revelation that McDonald's had seen such injuries many times before. Company documents showed that in the past decade McDonald's had received at least 700 reports of coffee burns ranging from mild to third degree, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000. "

Let's see. Do they sell 500 million cups of coffee a year? That has to be higher, but it's a nice, round number. Over a decade, that's 5,000 million - 5 billion cups of coffee. And they get 700 reports of coffee burns, "ranging from mild to third degree"?

I'm actually surprised that the number of reports is so low. There has to be more incidents of spilled coffee. Perhaps the vast majority realize that they themselves are to blame?

Also from the same source:
"The trial lasted seven sometimes mind-numbing days. Experts dueled over the temperature at which coffee causes burns. A scientist testifying for McDonald's argued that any coffee hotter than 130 degrees could produce third-degree burns, so it didn't matter whether Mc Donald's coffee was hotter. But a doctor testifying on behalf of Mrs. Liebeck argued that lowering the serving temperature to about 160 degrees could make a big difference, because it takes less than three seconds to produce a third-degree burn at 190 degrees, about 12 to 15 seconds at 180 degrees and about 20 seconds at 160 degrees."

3 seconds for third degree, compared to 12 with a 10 degree drop. That's likely enough time that the spilled coffee would cool before reaching third degree burns. I don't think there's a set standard for coffee temperature, but when it can cause severe burns in three second, it needs a warning.

Yeah, put a label on the cup. Only, it won't help. People that don't realize that hot coffee can burn you, can probably not read anyway.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

I did. The jury awarded her $2.9 mil...

So she didn't "get" $2.9 million, did she?

 

[CFLarsen]

So she didn't "get" $2.9 million, did she?

No.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

...My favorite fast food place is Subway. I have noticed in my travels around the country that some Subways use low-fat mayo in their tuna and some use regular mayo. I hate low-fat mayo, and when I asked, they said that was the local preference. Just like you will see little signs in some Subway restaurants in some areas that say their tuna is dolphin free.

Incidentally, Luke, in my travels for this thread I found something...er, interesting.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

No.

Thank you.

 

[Meffy]

It might be worth mentioning that a successful pathogen does not kill its host.

But it might also be argued that the host is the society, not the individuals composing it.

In which case I might be reduced to hemming and hawing.

 

[Luke T.]

Incidentally, Luke, in my travels for this thread I found something...er, interesting.

The tray liner doesn't offend me. It's true. Americans are fat. Although I don't buy into the Supersize Me movie which they have hitched their wagon to.

And I still prefer regular mayo over lite mayo on their sandwiches. In fact, I don't eat or drink anything "lite".

I stopped eating at a Subway because they switched to lite mayo. Tastes like crap to me. Went to another one that served regular mayo in the same town. So I guess I'm part of the market force that is trying to kill Americans.

It's about moderation more than anything. Eat half a sub instead of a whole one. Don't supersize your meal. That's the trick.

You can get away with a lot of food that's "bad for you" if you exercise regularly, too.

 

[Meffy]

It's about moderation more than anything. Eat half a sub instead of a whole one. Don't supersize your meal. That's the trick.

Bingo. Quality over quantity. I don't eat much so for me it's cutting back on cola and other soft drinks.

You can get away with a lot of food that's "bad for you" if you exercise regularly, too.

This is what I've been trying to do.

 

[Luke T.]

Bingo. Quality over quantity. I don't eat much so for me it's cutting back on cola and other soft drinks.

Yep. I was shocked to discover recently that I'm 18 pounds over what I want to be. So I have eliminated soft drinks from my diet. Strictly water. That alone started to make an immediate difference. I have also found I eat less when I drink water instead of soda. Bonus!

Now if I can just get my cow-orkers to stop bringing in tasty treats all the time and putting them in the lunchroom for general consumption...

 

[Z]

What is "modern Darwinism"?

*shrug*

Made it up... oh well.

 

[Soapy Sam]

Perhaps it is the whole concept of "drive through" serving which needs to be reviewed.
My own view is that cars are machines for travel, not restaurants.

 

[Luke T.]

Perhaps it is the whole concept of "drive through" serving which needs to be reviewed.
My own view is that cars are machines for travel, not restaurants.

It's a restaurant where I have the choice of music.

And I don't always have the time to go inside and sit around when I could be making miles.

ETA: I don't eat and drive. Most of the time when I go through a drive-thru for food, I eat in their parking lot. Either that, or I take it home and eat there. I'm not kidding about the entertainment choice. I listen to books on tape or NPR while I eat in the car.

 

[athon]

I'm still questioning how you can get third degree burns (deep enough to destroy nervous tissue) from 90.C coffee. Water loses its heat very quickly when exposed to the air (unlike oil burns, which keep on cooking). So, as I said, blistering I'd expect.

Fliter coffee is always hotter than esspresso (as esspresso is steamed and then condenses through the grinds, rapidly lowering the temperature), and is maintained close to boiling. But still... third degree? Man...

Athon

 

[HarryKeogh]

I'm still questioning how you can get third degree burns (deep enough to destroy nervous tissue) from 90.C coffee. Water loses its heat very quickly when exposed to the air (unlike oil burns, which keep on cooking). So, as I said, blistering I'd expect.

Fliter coffee is always hotter than esspresso (as esspresso is steamed and then condenses through the grinds, rapidly lowering the temperature), and is maintained close to boiling. But still... third degree? Man...

Athon

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

Plaintiffs' expert, a scholar in thermodynamics applied to human skin
burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full
thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony
showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent
of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus,
if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would
have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald's_coffee_case

Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin as she sat in the puddle of hot liquid for over ninety seconds.

Obviously those first few seconds is when the damage occurred. I do feel bad for this old lady and the pain she had to endure (third degree burns to her lap and groin areas, having to get skin grafts and be hospitalized for over a week...sheesh). Getting old sucks...sitting in the coffee and not being spry enough to jump up out of the mess.

 

[athon]

Thanks Harry. It makes more sense now.

Third degree. *whistles*

Athon