G'ah! my reply just got swallowed! Doing a quick and shorter rewrite:
The McDonald's coffee case is a touch more complicated than usually presented. A few details from the StellaAwards.com page about the case (the lady who spilled the coffee was named Stella, and the Stella Awards (a sister publication of This Is True) through it looks like 2007 gave awards for frivolous lawsuits).
In Stella's favor: She was not the driver of the car (usually it's claimed she tried to open the cup and add creamer while driving), she wasn't "Oh owie, that's uncomfortable, I think I'll sue" burned; she was burned severely enough to require skin grafts and two years of treatments related to the burns, and her lawyers found records of over 700 previous cases of burns from McDonald's coffee some of which also resulted in court cases. McDonald's itself admitted in court that the temperature it served the coffee at was unfit for consumption, but that it had no intention of changing its policies on serving temperature (gee, think that might have influenced the jury's reaction any?), and they had declined an offer to settle the case solely for medical costs.
In McDonald's favor: 700 cases in 10 years if across all of the McDonald's at the time is roughly 1 burn per 24 million cups of coffee which doesn't exactly sound like a high risk, the jury did find Stella to be 20% at fault in the case, and interestingly enough that temperature capable of causing third degree burns in 2-7 seconds in right within the recommended serving temperature suggested by the National Coffee Association.
Hmm. Okay. Not shorter than the original email...
Source: http://www.stellaawards.com/stella.html
-----
Will the transhumanist future have catgirls? Does Japan still exist? Well, there is your answer.
The McDonald's coffee case is a touch more complicated than usually presented. A few details from the StellaAwards.com page about the case (the lady who spilled the coffee was named Stella, and the Stella Awards (a sister publication of This Is True) through it looks like 2007 gave awards for frivolous lawsuits).
In Stella's favor: She was not the driver of the car (usually it's claimed she tried to open the cup and add creamer while driving), she wasn't "Oh owie, that's uncomfortable, I think I'll sue" burned; she was burned severely enough to require skin grafts and two years of treatments related to the burns, and her lawyers found records of over 700 previous cases of burns from McDonald's coffee some of which also resulted in court cases. McDonald's itself admitted in court that the temperature it served the coffee at was unfit for consumption, but that it had no intention of changing its policies on serving temperature (gee, think that might have influenced the jury's reaction any?), and they had declined an offer to settle the case solely for medical costs.
In McDonald's favor: 700 cases in 10 years if across all of the McDonald's at the time is roughly 1 burn per 24 million cups of coffee which doesn't exactly sound like a high risk, the jury did find Stella to be 20% at fault in the case, and interestingly enough that temperature capable of causing third degree burns in 2-7 seconds in right within the recommended serving temperature suggested by the National Coffee Association.
Hmm. Okay. Not shorter than the original email...
Source: http://www.stellaawards.com/stella.html
-----
Will the transhumanist future have catgirls? Does Japan still exist? Well, there is your answer.