This is an old storie, but nontheless, it's just goes to show you how dumb some ppl are?

Question

You remember the old lady that burned herself with coffee she bought at mcdonalds. So she sued mcdonalds because the cup didn't say anything about containing hot liquids. She was the one that ordered coffee, she was like 60+years old too so he had at least 45 years knowledge that coffee=hot. Do you think it was right for her to sue mcdonalds?

Answer 1

No kidding, like she was ever going to use that part of her anatomy ever again anyway.

Also she got way too much money, come on realy, what is the bluebook value of a 1938 pssy.

Answer 2

when this story first broke I agreed with you. After doing my research I found out that McDonald's had had many complaints about their coffee being too hot, and did not correct the problem. It was on that basis that the law suit was filed. So since then McDonald's now has fixed the problem and they post warnings. So I would have to say in this case the lawsuit was justified, I don't know what the payout for damages if any, were. I think some of the jury awards are way over the top, which takes away credibility of some of these lawsuits.

Answer 3

The reason the woman was able to sue is because there is a maximum temperature that you are allowed to sell a liquid. I believe it's around 160-165. The woman should not have been as severely burned as she was when the coffee spilled on her. She went back, and found out that the coffee they were selling was being handed to the customer at 195 degrees. When MacDonald's was told to sell the coffee at a lower temperature, they refused saying that their coffee didn't taste as good at a lower temperature, and so the woman sued.

Answer 4

Wow. Yes, 45 years is enough to establish that coffee=hot. The kind of hot that makes one think "I'll wait a few minutes before taking a big gulp." Not the kind of hot that makes one think "Better be careful with this lest it HOSPITALIZE me and cause me to need surgical repair of everywhere it touches my skin." She didn't sue for lack of warning that coffee is in fact above room temperature. She sued because the coffee was too dangerous to be placing in flimsy containers and passing it to people responsible for not spilling it while driving, and because when she was hospitalized, McDonald's did NOTHING to compensate her for the 7 days worth of hospital bills. Funny how fact gets in the way of a good laugh at someone's expense.

Answer 5

To be fair, the woman did receive third-degree burns, which really shouldn't happen if the coffee's the right temperature. Moreover, McDonald's knew about 700 instances of scalding before her.

Answer 6

This is what is wrong with people today. No one wants to take resposibility for their actions. Instead they blame others and sue if they want money. And the sad thing is that they win! If people who sued did not win, or if the awarded sums were not so big, it would discourage this litigious society we now live in.

Answer 7

you forget to mention that this same McDonalds location had been cited 5 times in the previous year for serving coffee that was over the temperature allowed by health regulations. they broke the law, someone got hurt by it, they deserved to pay.

Answer 8

i think she knew it was hot , but thier coffee is scalding hot, and depending on weather she thought it was thier fault it got spilled or not , she could sue. they should put a warning on the coffee that it is extreamly hot, not just hot. i have burned myself on the coffee there before too , i didnt sue , but when i ordered the coffee i wasnt exspecting it to be so hot that it could have takin my hand off

Answer 9

Absolutely not.

I can't believe she actually won too!

I guess the saying is true, you get a good enough lawyer, and you can get away with murder....*cough* OJ!