HomeRoast Digest


Topic: McDonald's Coffee Lawsuit (9 msgs / 476 lines)
1) From: Sandy Schaefer
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Thought you guys might enjoy this (Stella Awards)
Subject: Fw: Stella Awards
<Snip>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ =
_ _
EMAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This Email message, and any attachments, may contain confidential
patient health information that is legally protected. This information
is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.
The authorized recipient of this information is prohibited from =
disclosing
this information to any other party unless required to do so by law
or regulation and is required to destroy the information after its =
stated
need has been fulfilled. If you are not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action
taken in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly =
prohibited.
If you have received this information in error, please notify
the sender immediately by replying to this message and delete the
message from your system.

2) From: Derek Bradford
Funny, maybe.  Fake?  Definitely.  Stop the spreading of crap on the
Internet; research before you forward.http://www.stellaawards.com/bogus.html--Derek
On 6/8/07, Sandy Schaefer  wrote:
<Snip>
-- 
Every path but your own is the path of fate.  --Thoreau

3) From: Sandy Andina
--Apple-Mail-50--1042819791
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset-ASCII;
	delsp=yes;
	format=flowed
Hate to burst your bubble, but according to Snopes.com, THIS IS A  
HOAX. (It's been circulating for years, a favorite device of tort  
reform PACs).  There have been some equally frivolous suits actually  
filed but ALL were dismissed (with some plaintiffs' having been  
sanctioned for filing suits in bad faith).   That infamous Liebeck v.  
McDonald's suit?  Defense and corporate lawyers and the tort reform  
lobby conveniently fail to mention that the coffee was not just hot  
but waaaay hotter than the norm in the fast food industry, that  
McDonald's knew it and failed to warn customers, and before Ms.  
Liebeck's suit they had quietly paid out several settlements to  
previously injured patrons--on condition they not mention their  
claims or settlements.  Ms. L's case came to trial because she  
suffered third-degree burns and the proffered settlement wouldn't  
have covered medical expenses and months of physical therapy and  
rehab-hospital care (not to mention pain and suffering).  As a result  
of that case Mickey D's finally started putting warnings on its  
coffee cups.......and lowered the serving temperature.
Don't believe every circulating e-mail you read, even if it does seem  
to bear out your own philosophies.
On Jun 7, 2007, at 10:39 PM, Sandy Schaefer wrote:
<Snip>
Sandy Andina
www.sandyandina.com
www.myspace.com/sandyandina
--Apple-Mail-50--1042819791
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charsetO-8859-1
Hate to burst your bubble, but =
according to Snopes.com, THIS IS A HOAX. (It's been circulating for =
years, a favorite device of tort reform PACs).  There have been some =
equally frivolous suits actually filed but ALL were dismissed (with some =
plaintiffs' having been sanctioned for filing suits in bad faith).  =
 That infamous Liebeck v. McDonald's suit?  Defense and corporate =
lawyers and the tort reform lobby conveniently fail to mention that the =
coffee was not just hot but waaaay hotter than the norm in the fast food =
industry, that McDonald's knew it and failed to warn customers, and =
before Ms. Liebeck's suit they had quietly paid out several settlements =
to previously injured patrons--on condition they not mention their =
claims or settlements.  Ms. L's case came to trial because she =
suffered third-degree burns and the proffered settlement wouldn't have =
covered medical expenses and months of physical therapy and =
rehab-hospital care (not to mention pain and suffering).  As a result =
of that case Mickey D's finally started putting warnings on its coffee =
cups.......and lowered the serving temperature.
Don't believe every = circulating e-mail you read, even if it does seem to bear out your own = philosophies. On Jun 7, 2007, at 10:39 PM, Sandy = Schaefer wrote:
Thought you guys might enjoy this (Stella = Awards)
Subject: Fw: Stella Awards

>
> Time once again to review the = winners of the
> Annual "Stella Awards." = The
> Stella Awards are named after 81 = year-old
> Stella Liebeck who spilled hot
> coffee on herself and successfully sued
> McDonald's (in NM). That case
> inspired the Stella Awards for the most
> frivolous, ridiculous, successful
> lawsuits in the United States.
>

Sandy = Andinawww.sandyandina.comwww.myspace.com/sandyandina=

= = --Apple-Mail-50--1042819791--

4) From: Brett Mason
Also, the award was reduced at a later time...
My 16 yr old was burned the next year at a public restarant, where an
emplyee put a 22oz hot coffee within reach of the 8month old in his high
chair.  My wife was up front paying the bill (baby safe in high chair -
would have thought).  A week at the intensive care burn unit at UCI Medical
Center, and scars for the rest of his life.  His settlement amounts to about
$130K, primarily for future medical if it should arise.  Now, 16 yrs later,
he seems fine, except for scars across his entire chest.  He has a college
plan...
Brett
  Stupid happens.
  Courts can help.
  The scars are forever...
On 6/7/07, Sandy Andina  wrote:
<Snip>
-- 
Cheers,
Bretthttp://homeroast.freeservers.com

5) From: Randall Nortman
Those stories are funny, but not true, and not the real Stella Awards.
See:http://www.stellaawards.com/bogus.htmlAnd for the equally ridiculous but true stories that won the real 2006">http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.aspandhttp://www.stellaawards.com/bogus.htmlAnd for the equally ridiculous but true stories that won the real 2006
Stellas, see:http://www.stellaawards.com/2006.htmlOn Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 11:39:39PM -0400, Sandy Schaefer wrote:
<Snip>
[...]

6) From: Sandy Schaefer
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
The explanations by Brett and Sandy appear thought out. However, the =
site page =http://www.stellaawards.com/bogus.htmlonly provides the word "fabricated" for an explanation. I found =
the site shallow on proving its point actually more down lines of.  =
"spreading of crap".
 
 Guess forward "might" not be enjoyable to some because of peoples =
strong political view points. Perhaps, point of discussion should be =
rather McDonald's was brewing (serving too?) coffee properly at correct =
tempertures?
Sandy

7) From: Sandy Andina
--Apple-Mail-55--991730688
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charsetNDOWS-1252;
	delsp=yes;
	format=flowed
Sigh.  Sandy, check out www.snopes.com, which not only states the  
Stella Awards e-mail is false but also gives a history of how and by  
whom it is usually spread (the "law firm" supposedly promulgating it  
doesn't even exist).  "Spreading crap" may be a harsh pejorative, but  =
the underlying meaning, i.e., "promulgating false information,"  
remains spot-on.  This has NOTHING to do my "political viewpoint;" if  =
anything, your post and criticism of our reactions is directly  
related to your own political viewpoint (and I am carefully using the  =
neutral word "viewpoint") and that of the fabricators of the original  =
e-mail.  So what if the high temperatures McDonald's used to brew its  =
coffee were in fact "correct" for optimal brewing? The fact is  
UNDISPUTED that those SERVING temperatures were not only higher than  
those at other take-out restaurants, but that McDonald's knew it and  
failed to disclose it to its customers--and the law is clear that it  
had a duty to warn of an unusual dangerous condition (which it now  
does).  Yes, coffee is supposed to be hot.  But if it is hotter than  
a reasonable person would expect, then there is definitely a duty to  
warn.  (And though I am a lawyer, I do not do personal injury or  
product/premises liability lawsuits, so I don't have a dog in this  
fight---in fact, as a doctor's wife my bias is anti-litigiousness;   
but also as a doctor's wife and former accident victim (I was struck  
by a car that made an illegal turn into my crosswalk), I find it  
reprehensible that anyone would ridicule such a plaintiff without  
knowing ALL the facts and with no knowledge of what it's like to  
suffer physical injury as the result of another's negligence.  I also  =
once spilled hot coffee on myself back in the 1970s--and I can tell  
you that even the second-degree burn I got sent me to the ER and hurt  =
like hell for weeks.  And I knew how hot it was--but Stella didn't  
and was much more seriously injured. Give the poor lady a break.
On Jun 8, 2007, at 12:53 PM, Sandy Schaefer wrote:
<Snip>
 
<Snip>
 
<Snip>
<Snip>
Sandy Andina
www.sandyandina.com
www.myspace.com/sandyandina
--Apple-Mail-55--991730688
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charsetNDOWS-1252
Sigh.  Sandy, check out www.snopes.com, which not only states =
the Stella Awards e-mail is false but also gives a history of how and by =
whom it is usually spread (the "law firm" supposedly promulgating it =
doesn't even exist).  "Spreading crap" may be a harsh pejorative, but =
the underlying meaning, i.e., "promulgating false information," remains =
spot-on.  This has NOTHING to do my "political viewpoint;" if =
anything, your post and criticism of our reactions is directly related =
to your own political viewpoint (and I am carefully using the neutral =
word "viewpoint") and that of the fabricators of the original e-mail.  =
So what if the high temperatures McDonald's used to brew its coffee were =
in fact "correct" for optimal brewing? The fact is UNDISPUTED that those =
SERVING temperatures were not only higher than those at other take-out =
restaurants, but that McDonald's knew it and failed to disclose it to =
its customers--and the law is clear that it had a duty to warn of an =
unusual dangerous condition (which it now does).  Yes, coffee is =
supposed to be hot.  But if it is hotter than a reasonable person =
would expect, then there is definitely a duty to warn.  (And though I =
am a lawyer, I do not do personal injury or product/premises liability =
lawsuits, so I don't have a dog in this fight---in fact, as a doctor's =
wife my bias is anti-litigiousness;  but also as a doctor's wife and =
former accident victim (I was struck by a car that made an illegal turn =
into my crosswalk), I find it reprehensible that anyone would ridicule =
such a plaintiff without knowing ALL the facts and with no knowledge of =
what it's like to suffer physical injury as the result of another's =
negligence.  I also once spilled hot coffee on myself back in the =
1970s--and I can tell you that even the second-degree burn I got sent me =
to the ER and hurt like hell for weeks.  And I knew how hot it =
was--but Stella didn't and was much more seriously injured. Give the =
poor lady a break.
On Jun 8, 2007, at 12:53 PM, Sandy =
Schaefer wrote:
The explanations by Brett and = Sandy appear thought out. However, the site page http://www.stellaawards.com/bogus.htmlonly provides the word = “fabricated” for an explanation. I found the site shallow on proving = its point actually more down lines of.    Guess forward “might” not = be enjoyable to some because of peoples strong political view points. = Perhaps, point of discussion should be rather McDonald’s was brewing = (serving too?) coffee properly at correct = tempertures?

 

= Sandy = Andinawww.sandyandina.comwww.myspace.com/sandyandina=

= = --Apple-Mail-55--991730688--

8) From: Stephen Niezgoda
The big factor in the case as well was that McDonalds training manuals
stated the temperature at which coffe was to be served.  They were fined
numerous times by OSHA for putting their employees at risk by handling
beverages that were at temperatures above the legal safe limit.  They then
made it company policy to ignore the OSHA recommendations and reiterated to
managers and owners that coffee was to be served at a higher temp.
That is why they lost the lawsuit.  To put the award into perspective  the
Judge ruled on the $3 million which is the revenue generated by McDonalds
coffee in 2 days.
Brewing temperature and serving temperature are 2 very different things.
I urge people to do a little research on the case it is actually fairly
interesting
a good place to start is the center for justice and democracy - (slightly
left leaning consumer watchdog group even if you don't agree with them they
site their references and all sources are carefully documented)http://www.centerjd.org/free/mythbusters-free/MB_mcdonalds.htmI hate to propagate this thread, I haven't actually posted to the list in
many months but still read many threads daily.  I typically mentally filter
out most messages that are off topic and just delete them.  Lets please
avoid a politics war.  I apologize for an off topic post.
On 6/8/07, Sandy Andina  wrote:
<Snip>
-- 
No culture can live if it attempts to be exclusive.
Mohandas Gandhi

9) From: raymanowen
First, the stated subject represents an impossibility: "McDonald's
CoffeeLawsuit"
That reminds me of the 5 menu placards hanging at the Cinnabon shop at
Flatirons Marketplace: 2½ of them were pushing "Cinnabon Latta," whatever=
 in
the Blue Blazes that is. I'm not even curious- I've seen the little home
espresso machine sitting out on the shelf on the coffee maker wall.
They treat cinnamon rolls like Krispy Kreme treats doughnuts- and they're
directly opposite *$, which used to be a Peaberry coffee shop.
Field effect transistors have a parameter known as the "Pinchoff voltage,"
or Vp. No conductivity.
The aisle between the two stores is at least 40ft wide, and at certain time=
s
I'm sure it has an Aroma Pinchoff: Ap. No smell.
Not unlike the purveyors that swamp flavors with sugar, flavor syrups and
cream or "creamers" to distract your olfactory sensitivity to the garbage
dump.
Cheers -RayO, aka Opa!
"Cinnabon Coffee"


HomeRoast Digest