Governors of Texas, South Carolina sign tort reform into law

One other comment. Why does every time tort reform is brought up, the McDonald's case is automatically brought up? Do people realize it's almost 20 years old? If that case is all you have for support, your support is pretty weak. If frivolous lawsuits were as rampant, as portrayed, shouldn't we have had another equally notorious case in the last 20 years?

Temporal said:

It doesn't matter if it's a "good case" or not. Corporations can hire entire legal teams. If you're a customer that they've genuinely screwed, you are likely to get double screwed.

This is business protectionism and nothing more. I smell cronyism here. No law like this gets passed in Texas without a nice bonus from lobbying groups.

Outrageous.

Click to expand...

No, that's not true at all.

I've taken on big corporations more than once, was completely in the right each time, and was able to prove it. Once was against United Airline with their three lawyers.

That was here in Canada but if Judges can't decide between right and wrong then the problem extends much deeper than the example we see on this thread..

Tettsuo said:

I don't get what your point is. Are you just saying it's rare or are you implying the above information means the coffee wasn't too hot because statistically someone being burned is rare?

Click to expand...

I'm saying that statistically no one gets hurt by McDonald's coffee. If it were a true problem, you would have seen MUCH higher numbers of people being seriously burned. If you can't get out of the noise fluctuations, you have no statistically meaningful data. That's how it works. The real problem that happened with McDonald's is that they had someone on the stand who said essentially just that. 700 people over 10 years got burned, but McDonalds sells over a 10 billion cups of coffee in that time. So you're talking 70 in a billion chance. It goes to show the danger of the product. 70 in a billion is essentially zero. It wasn't a problem. If the coffee was so hot to cause burning or the cup somehow defective, you wouldn't realize a 70 in a billion chance; it would be higher.

Here's the thing though, someone from McDonalds says what I just said. It's factually correct. But the jury hears "OMG, he just said 700 people is zero!!!! WTFOMGBBQ!!!!!one!!one!!!". They freaked out and acted emotionally after that, exactly the opposite of what they are supposed to do. 70 divided by a billion is essentially zero. There will always be people burning themselves somehow or doing something zero, you will rarely realize an actual zero if there is a probability of something happening. Given enough time, all probabilities work out. However, if the coffee was a threat they claimed it to be, you should statistically be above noise; meaning that you would see a statistically significant number of burns in this case. 70 in a billion is not statistically significant.

haymarket said:

The historical record of the last time period you listed DOES NOT support your opinions. I sure wish we had progressive government over that time period - but we have not. We got Reagan and Bush followed by a moderate Democrat who turned the economy around and ended up in a positive position. Then we got Bush2 and the massive growth in the debt due to two tax cuts and fighting wars off the books without paying for them. There was no 20 to 30 years of progressive government to blame.

The facts of the historical record simply do not support you.

Click to expand...

I will and have admitted that the best we have had over that time period was Clinton, but the fact still remains .. that the best we had .. still added 1.5 trillion dollars to our debt, and that was with a 25% tax hike, a booming dot com bubble that busted in 2000 and cuts to defense spending, no wars being fought unless you want to count the times he lobbed a few bombs to take publicity away from him lying to the grand jury. All that .. and the best we can claim is another 1.5 trillion dollars in debt ? I would hardly call any one of the too fiscally conservative …. by even the broadest of standards . It's clear that progressive politics just haven't worked.

DemonMyst said:

You take a sip of hot coffee and burn your tongue so you sue McDonalds.. The person that did that actually won and got damages, and now on the bottom of their cups is the message 'The beverage you are about to enjoy is hot.'..

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

$640,000 for being a dufus when it comes to drinking a hot cup of jo..

Click to expand...

If you're going to cite the case, you should cite it accurately:

She didn't "take a sip"; she had it between her legs to put cream in it and it fell on her crotch and thighs causing 3rd Degree Burns when the lid hitched while she was trying to take it off. She was also in the passenger's seat, by the way - not driving as nearly 80% of people believe.

If you'll further note: she initially wanted to simply get McDonalds to pay for the $20,000 in medical expenses and lost income, but they refused, thus resulting in the court case.

If you'd also note McDonald's history with this particular issue, there had been more than 700 previous incidents reported to McDonald's with settlements of up to $500,000 due to third degree burns from their coffee.

Suffering 3rd Degree Burns on your junk and simply asking (initially) for hospital bills to be covered isn't doesn't rank very near the top of frivolity when you know the facts of the case. But, because giant corporations are so perfect at propaganda, they've led people to believe a lot of things about this case that simply aren't true. They also perfect leave out that there were several settlement offers on the table that McDonald's simply ignored or so insultingly undercut, that there was basically no choice but to go to court (they offered her $800 to settle at first).

If you want a truly frivolous lawsuit, you should point to the woman who sued a Haunted House for being too scary and causing emotional distress or the guy who sued Bud Light because when he drank beer, beautiful women didn't appear. Those things are frivolous. 3rd Degree Burns aren't.

Tettsuo said:

No, your facts are not straight at all. You're just parroting some information that was given to you, and honestly regarding this case I did the same thing.

Click to expand...

Actually I did my my own research.

Do some actual research on the case. You'll see you're absolutely incorrect.

Better yet, let me do it for you since I don't believe you'll actually do it.

The Actual Facts about the Mcdonalds' Coffee Case

Click to expand...

I did do some research.

Here are the facts. Anyone who puts a cup of hot liquid between their legs for the purposes of taking the lid off in order to put cream and sugar in it is a moron. The second fact is that the coffee was served at or near optimal temperature. I have cited a coffee enthusiast site as well as a coffee brewer manufacture site.


How To Brew Coffee - National Coffee Association
Your brewer should maintain a water temperature between 195 - 205 degrees Fahrenheit for optimal extraction. Colder water will result in flat, underextracted coffee while water that is too hot will also cause a loss of quality in the taste of the coffee.

snip...

Brewed coffee should be enjoyed immediately!

Pour it into a warmed mug or coffee cup so that it will maintain its temperature as long as possible. Brewed coffee begins to lose its optimal taste moments after brewing so only brew as much coffee as will be consumed immediately. If it will be a few minutes before it will be served, the temperature should be maintained at 180 - 185 degrees Fahrenheit.



BUNN Coffee Basics: Holding and Serving Know How
Ideal serving temperature: 155ºF to 175ºF (70ºC to 80ºC)

The Barbarian said:

I will and have admitted that the best we have had over that time period was Clinton, but the fact still remains .. that the best we had .. still added 1.5 trillion dollars to our debt, and that was with a 25% tax hike, a booming dot com bubble that busted in 2000 and cuts to defense spending, no wars being fought unless you want to count the times he lobbed a few bombs to take publicity away from him lying to the grand jury. All that .. and the best we can claim is another 1.5 trillion dollars in debt ? I would hardly call any one of the too fiscally conservative …. by even the broadest of standards . It's clear that progressive politics just haven't worked.

Click to expand...

Again - the historical record of the actual facts of the past thirty years do not support your premise in any any shape or form.

Ikari said:

I'm saying that statistically no one gets hurt by McDonald's coffee. If it were a true problem, you would have seen MUCH higher numbers of people being seriously burned. If you can't get out of the noise fluctuations, you have no statistically meaningful data. That's how it works. The real problem that happened with McDonald's is that they had someone on the stand who said essentially just that. 700 people over 10 years got burned, but McDonalds sells over a 10 billion cups of coffee in that time. So you're talking 70 in a billion chance. It goes to show the danger of the product. 70 in a billion is essentially zero. It wasn't a problem. If the coffee was so hot to cause burning or the cup somehow defective, you wouldn't realize a 70 in a billion chance; it would be higher.

Here's the thing though, someone from McDonalds says what I just said. It's factually correct. But the jury hears "OMG, he just said 700 people is zero!!!! WTFOMGBBQ!!!!!one!!one!!!". They freaked out and acted emotionally after that, exactly the opposite of what they are supposed to do. 70 divided by a billion is essentially zero. There will always be people burning themselves somehow or doing something zero, you will rarely realize an actual zero if there is a probability of something happening. Given enough time, all probabilities work out. However, if the coffee was a threat they claimed it to be, you should statistically be above noise; meaning that you would see a statistically significant number of burns in this case. 70 in a billion is not statistically significant.

Click to expand...

-chuckles- one of use has to check our figures again .. when I do the math .. I get 1.8 trillion cups of coffee sold in the US alone .. the site I found claims they sell 500 million cups a day .
McDonald’s coffee in the U.S.

disneydude said:

Wrong....you are completely misinformed like so many other people.

The coffee was served at a temperature that was WAY too hot. Coffee should not be served at a temperature that causes the level of burning that occurred in that case.
Second, McDonalds had been warned numerous times before this incident and chose to do nothing.

Click to expand...

The coffee was served at or near optimal temperature. Not only has a coffee brewing association has stated this but so has a coffee brewer manufacture.
How To Brew Coffee - National Coffee Association
Your brewer should maintain a water temperature between 195 - 205 degrees Fahrenheit for optimal extraction. Colder water will result in flat, underextracted coffee while water that is too hot will also cause a loss of quality in the taste of the coffee.

snip...

Brewed coffee should be enjoyed immediately!

Pour it into a warmed mug or coffee cup so that it will maintain its temperature as long as possible. Brewed coffee begins to lose its optimal taste moments after brewing so only brew as much coffee as will be consumed immediately. If it will be a few minutes before it will be served, the temperature should be maintained at 180 - 185 degrees Fahrenheit.



BUNN Coffee Basics: Holding and Serving Know How
Ideal serving temperature: 155ºF to 175ºF (70ºC to 80ºC)

Third, the lawsuit involved in that case did not occur until after McDonalds refused to cover the medical damages.

Click to expand...

Should I sue bic razors if I cut myself while shaving? I am a little over weight perhaps I should sue McDonalds and other fast places. I stubbed my toe on the corner of my coffee table should I sue the coffee table maker?

The family involved was not looking for punitive damages until

Click to expand...

Bull ****.

McDonalds took an irresponsible route.

Click to expand...

McDonalds did no such thing. McDonalds does not owe that woman squat. Does McDonalds owe every fat person on the planet? No Do razor blade companies owe every person who commited suicide or injured themselves any compensation? no

Here is a picture of what the McDonalds coffee did in that case. Be warned...its graphic: Google Images

Click to expand...

The degree of injury she suffered is irrelevant.

haymarket said:

Again - the historical record of the actual facts of the past thirty years do not support your premise in any any shape or form.

Click to expand...

of course not .. as a far left liberal you couldn't admit it no matter what the facts suggest

BWG said:

One other comment. Why does every time tort reform is brought up, the McDonald's case is automatically brought up? Do people realize it's almost 20 years old? If that case is all you have for support, your support is pretty weak. If frivolous lawsuits were as rampant, as portrayed, shouldn't we have had another equally notorious case in the last 20 years?

Click to expand...

I'll start off with My favorite .. just showing yet again . What great public servants we have.

Marcy Noriega, a California police officer decided to tase a suspect in the back of her car when he became uncontrollable and started kicking at the windows. Noriega drew her taser from her belt and fired it at the man. Unfortunately for the crook, the officer had accidentally drawn her gun instead, and she shot him in the chest – killing him. The city is now suing the taser company, arguing that any reasonable officer could mistakenly draw and shoot their gun instead of their taser. They are suing for the full costs of the wrongful death lawsuit which the man’s family has filed against the city.

Click to expand...

Isn't it a great feeling to know that any reasonable officer of the law …. can't tell the difference between a taser and a real gun ??? Really makes me feel secure in our law enforcement people on the job don't it ?

PeteEU said:

Ahh the Texas GOP.. screwing people over since the last century!

Click to expand...

Was easier to get it passed in the lower educated states! :sun