@SanctionII said:
The facts of the McDonald's coffee case mentioned in this thread by those who dug them up leads me to question what exactly was it that McDonald's did wrong. Is it merely serving coffee that is "too hot" (however you define that term)?
If so, it would appear that McDonald's (and other businesses) are legally obligated to anticipate that people (customers, vendors, heck even trespassers, etc.) that the business interacts with can and will be idiots; and thus must created business practices that reduce the chances that the idiots will hurt themselves.
Yes, what McDonald's did wrong here was serve coffee that was too hot. It's important to note here that McDonald's had been sued many, many times previously for coffee burns and had reached settlements with many people as a result. They were aware of the dangers of their coffee, had had internal people recommend turning down the temperature, and were actually serving it hotter than coffee trade groups recommend. McDonald's claimed this super-hot temperature was because the majority of their coffee was served through the drive-thru and it needed to be super-heated so the coffee would still be hot when the driver reached his/her destination. However, McDonald's own research proved this claim to be a lie - purchasers nearly always drink the coffee immediately.
Businesses are required to mitigate known hazards. Has nothing to do with "chances that idiots will hurt themselves". If a company has a product they know to be hazardous - as coffee at 190F very obviously is - they have to take steps to make it as safe as possible. Such steps would include cup materials that are thick enough, and of the right materials, to prevent you from burning your fingers simply from handling the cup. Other steps might be to actually reduce the hazard - in this case by reducing the temperature of the coffee. Again, McDonald's own people recommended that they do just that - and they did not.
And, again, Stella Liebeck WAS found to be at fault in this case. The jury determined an original amount for the damages and then took - I believe - 20% off the top as her portion of the liability.
Again, let's consider a scenario - you've got the cup of coffee on your tray. You pick it up and the jerking motion causes the cup to fall over, spilling the coffee directly into your crotch area. What is a reasonable amount of damage for you to sustain in that instance? We've already had people in this thread say they have no problem with 3rd degree burns and 20+ skin grafts. So where's the line? At what point above 3rd degree burns and 20+ skin grafts does the damage become unreasonable?
p.s. The amount the jury awarded was a two days of McDonald's revenues derived from coffee sales.
We have a culture of victim blaming in the sports forum but now we have hit a new low , Steve is blaming the victims grandson
If that bastard had prepared granny's coffee like he should have this poor corporation wouldn't have had to go through the the trauma of being sued .
McDonalds should counter sue the boy for elder abuse.
If that had happened then maybe Urban would still have a job? Think of the children people I implore you , sue a regular person nearby whenever something happens , the big corporations that poison our fast food must be protected at all costs
if McDonalds was serving coffee 20 degrees colder and ol' Stella did exactly what she did when it was hotter and got the same result, I suppose she would still have sued but gotten less money. that's the point of the tort reforms that were brought and I suppose are still being sought. smart people do stupid things and then are loathe to accept responsibility, it seems to be human nature.
to Urban Meyer, I still haven't seen anything that contradicts what I posted earlier, that he "reported" and then lied about any knowledge of the abuse most probably to protect a friend. while that may paint him as a loyal fool who lies, I don't think it means he should be terminated.
I've never had a hot coffee cup near my lap. Because it's common sense, not to do that.
So you've never drank coffee? Ever? I'm sitting down right now. If I were drinking coffee - which I don't do, hate the stuff - the cup would be approximately 16-18" from my lap, if that. I would call that "near".
You airbag example comparison with the coffee is silly. That airbag is a defective product. There was nothing defective about the coffee.
Depends on how you define defective. 20-30 degrees hotter than recommended (hot enough to actually burn the coffee itself) after already having multiple settlements with injured consumers could easily be interpreted as "defective".
Please stop with the lawyer-speak spins.
You know that "near" meant close enough to be in a position where it is potentially hazardous. A cup of hot coffee being 16-18" away from the lap on a table, is certainly not the same thing as placing the cup between the knees.
Some folks like ice cold coffee. Some folks like piping hot coffee. The temperature of the coffee is a question of preference, not an example of a defective product.
I've never had a hot coffee cup near my lap. Because it's common sense, not to do that.
So you've never drank coffee? Ever? I'm sitting down right now. If I were drinking coffee - which I don't do, hate the stuff - the cup would be approximately 16-18" from my lap, if that. I would call that "near".
You airbag example comparison with the coffee is silly. That airbag is a defective product. There was nothing defective about the coffee.
Depends on how you define defective. 20-30 degrees hotter than recommended (hot enough to actually burn the coffee itself) after already having multiple settlements with injured consumers could easily be interpreted as "defective".
Let's not forget that she was initially offered $800.00. If I were the judge I would have tripled the original judgement. Also she admitted partial blame. I find it sad that anyone would call this a frivolous suit, had McDonalds paid her initial request, that would have been reasonable.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
Yes, what McDonald's did wrong here was serve coffee that was too hot. It's important to note here that McDonald's had been sued many, many times previously for coffee burns and had reached settlements with many people as a result. They were aware of the dangers of their coffee, had had internal people recommend turning down the temperature, and were actually serving it hotter than coffee trade groups recommend. McDonald's claimed this super-hot temperature was because the majority of their coffee was served through the drive-thru and it needed to be super-heated so the coffee would still be hot when the driver reached his/her destination. However, McDonald's own research proved this claim to be a lie - purchasers nearly always drink the coffee immediately.
Businesses are required to mitigate known hazards. Has nothing to do with "chances that idiots will hurt themselves". If a company has a product they know to be hazardous - as coffee at 190F very obviously is - they have to take steps to make it as safe as possible. Such steps would include cup materials that are thick enough, and of the right materials, to prevent you from burning your fingers simply from handling the cup. Other steps might be to actually reduce the hazard - in this case by reducing the temperature of the coffee. Again, McDonald's own people recommended that they do just that - and they did not.
And, again, Stella Liebeck WAS found to be at fault in this case. The jury determined an original amount for the damages and then took - I believe - 20% off the top as her portion of the liability.
Again, let's consider a scenario - you've got the cup of coffee on your tray. You pick it up and the jerking motion causes the cup to fall over, spilling the coffee directly into your crotch area. What is a reasonable amount of damage for you to sustain in that instance? We've already had people in this thread say they have no problem with 3rd degree burns and 20+ skin grafts. So where's the line? At what point above 3rd degree burns and 20+ skin grafts does the damage become unreasonable?
p.s. The amount the jury awarded was a two days of McDonald's revenues derived from coffee sales.
Best post on the subject.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
Regarding the OP; I am not sure I like where this has gone, a law(?) written to protect children who are terrified of their abuser is being applied to a grown woman who should be able to get the help she needs.
Also troubling is when people assume a wife tells her husband everything she knows. Perhaps the alleged victim asked her friend not to say anything. Husbands and wives keep secrets from eachother all the time for all kinds of reasons. Isn't it possible Urban's wife kept the information to herself in order to protect her husband?
Either way, I do not like the compulsion to report possible abuse by a third (fourth, fifth etc?) party unless a child is involved.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
I've never had a hot coffee cup near my lap. Because it's common sense, not to do that.
So you've never drank coffee? Ever? I'm sitting down right now. If I were drinking coffee - which I don't do, hate the stuff - the cup would be approximately 16-18" from my lap, if that. I would call that "near".
You airbag example comparison with the coffee is silly. That airbag is a defective product. There was nothing defective about the coffee.
Depends on how you define defective. 20-30 degrees hotter than recommended (hot enough to actually burn the coffee itself) after already having multiple settlements with injured consumers could easily be interpreted as "defective".
Let's not forget that she was initially offered $800.00. If I were the judge I would have tripled the original judgement. Also she admitted partial blame. I find it sad that anyone would call this a frivolous suit, had McDonalds paid her initial request, that would have been reasonable.
What's even sadder is that some juries allow murderers to go free as in OJ Simpson who was obviously guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of murdering two innocent people.
The jury also botched this hot coffee case.
Despite occasional mistakes, our system of justice is certainly superior to a king and his court making all the rulings. IE Saudi Arabia where the king can order your hand to be chopped off if ya steal a candy bar.
I've never had a hot coffee cup near my lap. Because it's common sense, not to do that.
So you've never drank coffee? Ever? I'm sitting down right now. If I were drinking coffee - which I don't do, hate the stuff - the cup would be approximately 16-18" from my lap, if that. I would call that "near".
You airbag example comparison with the coffee is silly. That airbag is a defective product. There was nothing defective about the coffee.
Depends on how you define defective. 20-30 degrees hotter than recommended (hot enough to actually burn the coffee itself) after already having multiple settlements with injured consumers could easily be interpreted as "defective".
Let's not forget that she was initially offered $800.00. If I were the judge I would have tripled the original judgement. Also she admitted partial blame. I find it sad that anyone would call this a frivolous suit, had McDonalds paid her initial request, that would have been reasonable.
What's even sadder is that some juries allow murderers to go free as in OJ Simpson who was obviously guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of murdering two innocent people.
The jury also botched this hot coffee case.
Despite occasional mistakes, our system of justice is certainly superior to a king and his court making all the rulings. IE Saudi Arabia where the king can order your hand to be chopped off if ya steal a candy bar.
so Stevek the jury of one person , 20 years later knows better than the jury of 12 that was in the court room ?
That is just about right for the sports forum logic standard
Despite occasional mistakes, our system of justice is certainly superior to a king and his court making all the rulings.
That would be an interesting topic. Is it better to just have a wise man like Solomon rule on a case, or is it better to have a panel of 7-15 people rule.
Solomon is an imaginary person so it sounds like a great idea , in fact lets ask the voices in our heads to put pete rose in the HOF
I've never had a hot coffee cup near my lap. Because it's common sense, not to do that.
So you've never drank coffee? Ever? I'm sitting down right now. If I were drinking coffee - which I don't do, hate the stuff - the cup would be approximately 16-18" from my lap, if that. I would call that "near".
You airbag example comparison with the coffee is silly. That airbag is a defective product. There was nothing defective about the coffee.
Depends on how you define defective. 20-30 degrees hotter than recommended (hot enough to actually burn the coffee itself) after already having multiple settlements with injured consumers could easily be interpreted as "defective".
Let's not forget that she was initially offered $800.00. If I were the judge I would have tripled the original judgement. Also she admitted partial blame. I find it sad that anyone would call this a frivolous suit, had McDonalds paid her initial request, that would have been reasonable.
What's even sadder is that some juries allow murderers to go free as in OJ Simpson who was obviously guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of murdering two innocent people.
The jury also botched this hot coffee case.
Despite occasional mistakes, our system of justice is certainly superior to a king and his court making all the rulings. IE Saudi Arabia where the king can order your hand to be chopped off if ya steal a candy bar.
so Stevek the jury of one person , 20 years later knows better than the jury of 12 that was in the court room ?
That is just about right for the sports forum logic standard
That hot coffee case is widely known as a good example of a frivolous lawsuit being successful.
Perhaps being "successful" technically changes it from being a frivolous lawsuit as you imply. However not in my viewpoint.
I think you probably know that the vast majority of the American public believe that case is frivolous. And there was much outcry for tort reform as a result of that.
@larryallen73 said:
Is this thread about Urban Meyer or not? I am confused. Need to go get some coffee now.
if you go to McDonalds have your grandson open the coffee or get a good lawyer because if Steve winds up in the jury you won't win, and if its up to Solomon then somebody's baby is going to get partitioned
@larryallen73 said:
Is this thread about Urban Meyer or not? I am confused. Need to go get some coffee now.
if you go to McDonalds have your grandson open the coffee or get a good lawyer because if Steve winds up in the jury you won't win, and if its up to Solomon then somebody's baby is going to get partitioned
If Bronco winds up on the jury, you can murder two people, try to escape from the country in a live televised broadcast, be obviously guilty from the evidence, but find eleven other similar jurors to Bronco who will find you innocent.
@larryallen73 said:
Is this thread about Urban Meyer or not? I am confused. Need to go get some coffee now.
I recommend going to McDonalds for the coffee, spill some on your lap, get some scumbag lawyer to represent you in court, and walk away with enough money to buy a nice 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle PSA graded baseball card.
Just make sure the coffee doesn't spill on your private parts. Ruining those boys might not be worth any amount of money. LOL
@larryallen73 said:
Is this thread about Urban Meyer or not? I am confused. Need to go get some coffee now.
if you go to McDonalds have your grandson open the coffee or get a good lawyer because if Steve winds up in the jury you won't win, and if its up to Solomon then somebody's baby is going to get partitioned
If Bronco winds up on the jury, you can murder two people, try to escape from the country in a live televised broadcast, be obviously guilty from the evidence, but find eleven other similar jurors to Bronco who will find you innocent.
I actually owned a white 1995 bronco up until a few years ago , odly enough there was a bloody pair of fancy shoes in the back when I got it
I've never had a hot coffee cup near my lap. Because it's common sense, not to do that.
So you've never drank coffee? Ever? I'm sitting down right now. If I were drinking coffee - which I don't do, hate the stuff - the cup would be approximately 16-18" from my lap, if that. I would call that "near".
You airbag example comparison with the coffee is silly. That airbag is a defective product. There was nothing defective about the coffee.
Depends on how you define defective. 20-30 degrees hotter than recommended (hot enough to actually burn the coffee itself) after already having multiple settlements with injured consumers could easily be interpreted as "defective".
Let's not forget that she was initially offered $800.00. If I were the judge I would have tripled the original judgement. Also she admitted partial blame. I find it sad that anyone would call this a frivolous suit, had McDonalds paid her initial request, that would have been reasonable.
What's even sadder is that some juries allow murderers to go free as in OJ Simpson who was obviously guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of murdering two innocent people.
The jury also botched this hot coffee case.
Despite occasional mistakes, our system of justice is certainly superior to a king and his court making all the rulings. IE Saudi Arabia where the king can order your hand to be chopped off if ya steal a candy bar.
Agree on the OJ case. Disagree on the coffee case.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
@keets said:
to Urban Meyer, I still haven't seen anything that contradicts what I posted earlier, that he "reported" and then lied about any knowledge of the abuse most probably to protect a friend. while that may paint him as a loyal fool who lies, I don't think it means he should be terminated.
Ohio terminated a previous, very successful, coach (Jim Tressel) for lying about far less-serious accusations.
Let's not forget that, assuming Urban did report the accusations, that they kept Zach Smith on staff for 3 years with the exact same accusation over his head that they later fired him for.
You know that "near" meant close enough to be in a position where it is potentially hazardous. A cup of hot coffee being 16-18" away from the lap on a table, is certainly not the same thing as placing the cup between the knees.
So if you spill coffee that's at mouth-level, it just evaporates and doesn't land on your lap? You said you never have hot coffee "near" your lap. Since you haven't denied drinking hot coffee in your multiple responses, your claim of never having it "near" your lap is demonstrably false.
I think you probably know that the vast majority of the American public believe that case is frivolous. And there was much outcry for tort reform as a result of that.
The majority of the American public are misinformed on the case. They think she was driving, that she wasn't found to be at fault, and all kinds of other nonsense.
If recent times have shown us anything, it's that the American public doesn't give a damn about facts. How else do you explain InfoWars having millions of followers?
@JoeBanzai said:
Regarding the OP; I am not sure I like where this has gone, a law(?) written to protect children who are terrified of their abuser is being applied to a grown woman who should be able to get the help she needs.
Also troubling is when people assume a wife tells her husband everything she knows. Perhaps the alleged victim asked her friend not to say anything. Husbands and wives keep secrets from eachother all the time for all kinds of reasons. Isn't it possible Urban's wife kept the information to herself in order to protect her husband?
Either way, I do not like the compulsion to report possible abuse by a third (fourth, fifth etc?) party unless a child is involved.
OK, now here's a good area of debate.
I don't necessarily disagree with you. I do think there's some debate to be had over whether we should be using the same laws and standards that are in place to protect children to protect adults*. The argument "for", of course, is that spouses and partners (both male & female) get abused all the time and are afraid to go to the police but will confide in a non-police person. The argument against, as you articulated, is that we're talking adults and asking them to take a measure of responsibility is not completely out of the question. I still tend to lean toward the "for" but the "against" has some merit, too.
As for Urban's wife, I don't believe for a second she didn't tell him. That defies credulity. She knows this guy abuses his wife yet she doesn't tell Urban so the guy can keep his job? Instead of telling Urban so Urban can fire the guy? That makes no sense. But let's go with that for a moment - she doesn't tell Urban. She's still required by law to report the accusation, which she did not do.
However we might feel, the laws don't currently make any distinction.
Ohio terminated a previous, very successful, coach (Jim Tressel) for lying about far less-serious accusations
no not really. with Tressel it was about players and "notification" while it was with a Coach now with Meyer. Jim Tressel knew and didn't notify(forward e-mails) while Meyer knew, notified and then lied about knowing to the media or something.
I thought that the case with Tressel was ridiculous, players trading THEIR POSSESSIONS FOR TATOOS, but rules are rules.
@keets said: Ohio terminated a previous, very successful, coach (Jim Tressel) for lying about far less-serious accusations
no not really. with Tressel it was about players and "notification" while it was with a Coach now with Meyer. Jim Tressel knew and didn't notify(forward e-mails) while Meyer knew, notified and then lied about knowing to the media or something.
I thought that the case with Tressel was ridiculous, players trading THEIR POSSESSIONS FOR TATOOS, but rules are rules.
I think the Tressel firing was justified but, yeah, the rule itself is dumb.
And, yes, fair point on the distinction between the lying done by both coaches.
@bronco2078 said:
We have a culture of victim blaming in the sports forum but now we have hit a new low , Steve is blaming the victims grandson
The good news for all us rubberneckers is that new lows are hit daily here. It's like sitting on the second time at Indy waiting for a wreck. It's coming
m
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
You know that "near" meant close enough to be in a position where it is potentially hazardous. A cup of hot coffee being 16-18" away from the lap on a table, is certainly not the same thing as placing the cup between the knees.
So if you spill coffee that's at mouth-level, it just evaporates and doesn't land on your lap? You said you never have hot coffee "near" your lap. Since you haven't denied drinking hot coffee in your multiple responses, your claim of never having it "near" your lap is demonstrably false.
We all know the old lady handled the hot coffee in a careless manner and was harmed by it. That is not the fault of McDonalds.
The bottom line is that McDonalds did NOT change the temperature of their coffee. They did change the cup design, and whether or not that would have prevented this accident, i doubt it.
@bronco2078 said:
We have a culture of victim blaming in the sports forum but now we have hit a new low , Steve is blaming the victims grandson
The good news for all us rubberneckers is that new lows are hit daily here. It's like sitting on the second time at Indy waiting for a wreck. It's coming
m
<<< Maybe it's he whom she should have sued for grandson negligence? >>>
I stand by my comment intended for the famous attorney Jackie Chiles who i have read has already filed the case and is waiting for a trial date.
as things in this unfold and we find out more of what (may have) actually happened it gets harder to think what the end result for Urban Meyer might be.
I would ask a few questions to see if anyone knows the answers.
1.) were the Police involved at any point, and if so, when?
2.) were charges filed or anything done which would make everything publicly available, or was this just an incident between the Smiths that was reported to OSU officials?
3.) if this was a private matter reported to OSU with no Police involvement and Urban Meyer followed protocol, did he act properly to protect Privacy by lying about his knowledge of it?
@BillJones said:
From what I heard, he got on top of this quickly. Perhaps that perception is wrong.
At any rate the punishment for the crime seems to be PC based. If on of your subordinates beats his spouse or molests children, it ends you career. If they are in government, and are guilty of wrong doing (bribery, misappropriation of funds) from either party, there is always a group that will circle the wagons.
@Coinstartled said:
When you are paid nearly ten million bucks a year to shape the future of young men, you are responsible for the actions of the staff that you bring in.
@SanctionII said:
My recollection of the lawsuit over the split McDonald's coffee is that the cup of coffee was served to a drive through customer (an elderly woman in her 80's), that the coffee in the cup was heated to over 170 or 180 degrees, that while the coffee cup was being transferred to the woman customer (sitting in her car) somehow the cup was tipped over, or dropped (maybe because the surface of the cardboard or styrafoam cup was too hot to hold in one's hand due to the scalding hot coffee inside of the cup) and the coffee spilled out of the cup into the lap of the woman.
As I recall, she was driving around with it between her legs when it spilled, or at least she alone was the cause of the spill, and did not include the action of an employee. The claim was the temp of coffee made it a defective product.
@SanctionII said:
My recollection of the lawsuit over the split McDonald's coffee is that the cup of coffee was served to a drive through customer (an elderly woman in her 80's), that the coffee in the cup was heated to over 170 or 180 degrees, that while the coffee cup was being transferred to the woman customer (sitting in her car) somehow the cup was tipped over, or dropped (maybe because the surface of the cardboard or styrafoam cup was too hot to hold in one's hand due to the scalding hot coffee inside of the cup) and the coffee spilled out of the cup into the lap of the woman.
As I recall, she was driving around with it between her legs when it spilled, or at least she alone was the cause of the spill, and did not include the action of an employee. The claim was the temp of coffee made it a defective product.
She was sitting in the passenger seat of her grandsons car while parked
m
Edited
Walker Proof Digital Album Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Urban Meyer has already admitted he knew and that he reported what he knew. Of course his wife told him. The only question is should he be fired for lying about it. I think coaches lie about pretty much everything so it would be kind of hypocritical to fire him for lying about this but who knows.
As for the McDonald's case the majority of Americans are misinformed about the case. Other than a few folks like Stevek, the rest of America when told the actual facts would side with the jury. McDonald's was clearly in the wrong. There are plenty of examples of frivolous lawsuits, the McDonald's case is not one of them.
@fergie23 said:
Urban Meyer has already admitted he knew and that he reported what he knew. Of course his wife told him. The only question is should he be fired for lying about it. I think coaches lie about pretty much everything so it would be kind of hypocritical to fire him for lying about this but who knows.
As for the McDonald's case the majority of Americans are misinformed about the case. Other than a few folks like Stevek, the rest of America when told the actual facts would side with the jury. McDonald's was clearly in the wrong. There are plenty of examples of frivolous lawsuits, the McDonald's case is not one of them.
Robb
I am not "up to speed" on the Meyer subject. He DID report it? Too bad the victim didn't report it to the police instead of telling her friends.
Agree 100% on McDonalds.
2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
I am not "up to speed" on the Meyer subject. He DID report it? Too bad the victim didn't report it to the police instead of telling her friends.
Meyer claims he reported it. He released an "open letter" that essentially served as his defense against a "for cause" firing.
Of course, he also denied knowing about it. So...pick which version you believe.
Courtney Smith did report multiple 2015 incidents to the police.
to answer my own questions...............................
according to a report I read this morning: Powell, Ohio Police Chief Gary Vest states that Zach Smith wasn't charged as a result of anything from 2015. he further states that Privacy laws prevent him from releasing any details to the media.
I heard the gentleman who started all this with his story on the radio state that the Police Report originally said Smith was arrested. He stated the Powell Police Dept. changed the report to say Smith was investigated.
All these examples are just proving my point that it’s important to wait and get all the facts before idiots start calling for people’s jobs right away.
@perkdog said:
All these examples are just proving my point that it’s important to wait and get all the facts before idiots start calling for people’s jobs right away.
What winds up happening to Urban will be based purely on whether firing him will cost less money than keeping him. If some sponsors decide to boycott a TV show then hes gone, if a major donor pulls back on money then hes gone. If he is proven innocent but a sponsor pulls back for PR reasons he is gone.
Comments
Yes, what McDonald's did wrong here was serve coffee that was too hot. It's important to note here that McDonald's had been sued many, many times previously for coffee burns and had reached settlements with many people as a result. They were aware of the dangers of their coffee, had had internal people recommend turning down the temperature, and were actually serving it hotter than coffee trade groups recommend. McDonald's claimed this super-hot temperature was because the majority of their coffee was served through the drive-thru and it needed to be super-heated so the coffee would still be hot when the driver reached his/her destination. However, McDonald's own research proved this claim to be a lie - purchasers nearly always drink the coffee immediately.
Businesses are required to mitigate known hazards. Has nothing to do with "chances that idiots will hurt themselves". If a company has a product they know to be hazardous - as coffee at 190F very obviously is - they have to take steps to make it as safe as possible. Such steps would include cup materials that are thick enough, and of the right materials, to prevent you from burning your fingers simply from handling the cup. Other steps might be to actually reduce the hazard - in this case by reducing the temperature of the coffee. Again, McDonald's own people recommended that they do just that - and they did not.
And, again, Stella Liebeck WAS found to be at fault in this case. The jury determined an original amount for the damages and then took - I believe - 20% off the top as her portion of the liability.
Again, let's consider a scenario - you've got the cup of coffee on your tray. You pick it up and the jerking motion causes the cup to fall over, spilling the coffee directly into your crotch area. What is a reasonable amount of damage for you to sustain in that instance? We've already had people in this thread say they have no problem with 3rd degree burns and 20+ skin grafts. So where's the line? At what point above 3rd degree burns and 20+ skin grafts does the damage become unreasonable?
p.s. The amount the jury awarded was a two days of McDonald's revenues derived from coffee sales.
We have a culture of victim blaming in the sports forum but now we have hit a new low , Steve is blaming the victims grandson
If that bastard had prepared granny's coffee like he should have this poor corporation wouldn't have had to go through the the trauma of being sued .
McDonalds should counter sue the boy for elder abuse.
If that had happened then maybe Urban would still have a job? Think of the children people I implore you , sue a regular person nearby whenever something happens , the big corporations that poison our fast food must be protected at all costs
if McDonalds was serving coffee 20 degrees colder and ol' Stella did exactly what she did when it was hotter and got the same result, I suppose she would still have sued but gotten less money. that's the point of the tort reforms that were brought and I suppose are still being sought. smart people do stupid things and then are loathe to accept responsibility, it seems to be human nature.
to Urban Meyer, I still haven't seen anything that contradicts what I posted earlier, that he "reported" and then lied about any knowledge of the abuse most probably to protect a friend. while that may paint him as a loyal fool who lies, I don't think it means he should be terminated.
Please stop with the lawyer-speak spins.
You know that "near" meant close enough to be in a position where it is potentially hazardous. A cup of hot coffee being 16-18" away from the lap on a table, is certainly not the same thing as placing the cup between the knees.
Some folks like ice cold coffee. Some folks like piping hot coffee. The temperature of the coffee is a question of preference, not an example of a defective product.
Let's not forget that she was initially offered $800.00. If I were the judge I would have tripled the original judgement. Also she admitted partial blame. I find it sad that anyone would call this a frivolous suit, had McDonalds paid her initial request, that would have been reasonable.
Best post on the subject.
Regarding the OP; I am not sure I like where this has gone, a law(?) written to protect children who are terrified of their abuser is being applied to a grown woman who should be able to get the help she needs.
Also troubling is when people assume a wife tells her husband everything she knows. Perhaps the alleged victim asked her friend not to say anything. Husbands and wives keep secrets from eachother all the time for all kinds of reasons. Isn't it possible Urban's wife kept the information to herself in order to protect her husband?
Either way, I do not like the compulsion to report possible abuse by a third (fourth, fifth etc?) party unless a child is involved.
What's even sadder is that some juries allow murderers to go free as in OJ Simpson who was obviously guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of murdering two innocent people.
The jury also botched this hot coffee case.
Despite occasional mistakes, our system of justice is certainly superior to a king and his court making all the rulings. IE Saudi Arabia where the king can order your hand to be chopped off if ya steal a candy bar.
so Stevek the jury of one person , 20 years later knows better than the jury of 12 that was in the court room ?
That is just about right for the sports forum logic standard
Solomon is an imaginary person so it sounds like a great idea , in fact lets ask the voices in our heads to put pete rose in the HOF
Is this thread about Urban Meyer or not? I am confused. Need to go get some coffee now.
That hot coffee case is widely known as a good example of a frivolous lawsuit being successful.
Perhaps being "successful" technically changes it from being a frivolous lawsuit as you imply. However not in my viewpoint.
I think you probably know that the vast majority of the American public believe that case is frivolous. And there was much outcry for tort reform as a result of that.
if you go to McDonalds have your grandson open the coffee or get a good lawyer because if Steve winds up in the jury you won't win, and if its up to Solomon then somebody's baby is going to get partitioned
If Bronco winds up on the jury, you can murder two people, try to escape from the country in a live televised broadcast, be obviously guilty from the evidence, but find eleven other similar jurors to Bronco who will find you innocent.
I recommend going to McDonalds for the coffee, spill some on your lap, get some scumbag lawyer to represent you in court, and walk away with enough money to buy a nice 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle PSA graded baseball card.
Just make sure the coffee doesn't spill on your private parts. Ruining those boys might not be worth any amount of money. LOL
Is he the same guy from the Paris Hilton video?
I actually owned a white 1995 bronco up until a few years ago , odly enough there was a bloody pair of fancy shoes in the back when I got it
Agree on the OJ case. Disagree on the coffee case.
Forget the coffee, pick up a couple Big Mac coins.
Ohio terminated a previous, very successful, coach (Jim Tressel) for lying about far less-serious accusations.
Let's not forget that, assuming Urban did report the accusations, that they kept Zach Smith on staff for 3 years with the exact same accusation over his head that they later fired him for.
So if you spill coffee that's at mouth-level, it just evaporates and doesn't land on your lap? You said you never have hot coffee "near" your lap. Since you haven't denied drinking hot coffee in your multiple responses, your claim of never having it "near" your lap is demonstrably false.
The majority of the American public are misinformed on the case. They think she was driving, that she wasn't found to be at fault, and all kinds of other nonsense.
If recent times have shown us anything, it's that the American public doesn't give a damn about facts. How else do you explain InfoWars having millions of followers?
OK, now here's a good area of debate.
I don't necessarily disagree with you. I do think there's some debate to be had over whether we should be using the same laws and standards that are in place to protect children to protect adults*. The argument "for", of course, is that spouses and partners (both male & female) get abused all the time and are afraid to go to the police but will confide in a non-police person. The argument against, as you articulated, is that we're talking adults and asking them to take a measure of responsibility is not completely out of the question. I still tend to lean toward the "for" but the "against" has some merit, too.
As for Urban's wife, I don't believe for a second she didn't tell him. That defies credulity. She knows this guy abuses his wife yet she doesn't tell Urban so the guy can keep his job? Instead of telling Urban so Urban can fire the guy? That makes no sense. But let's go with that for a moment - she doesn't tell Urban. She's still required by law to report the accusation, which she did not do.
Ohio terminated a previous, very successful, coach (Jim Tressel) for lying about far less-serious accusations
no not really. with Tressel it was about players and "notification" while it was with a Coach now with Meyer. Jim Tressel knew and didn't notify(forward e-mails) while Meyer knew, notified and then lied about knowing to the media or something.
I thought that the case with Tressel was ridiculous, players trading THEIR POSSESSIONS FOR TATOOS, but rules are rules.
I think the Tressel firing was justified but, yeah, the rule itself is dumb.
And, yes, fair point on the distinction between the lying done by both coaches.
The good news for all us rubberneckers is that new lows are hit daily here. It's like sitting on the second time at Indy waiting for a wreck. It's coming
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
We all know the old lady handled the hot coffee in a careless manner and was harmed by it. That is not the fault of McDonalds.
The bottom line is that McDonalds did NOT change the temperature of their coffee. They did change the cup design, and whether or not that would have prevented this accident, i doubt it.
this is slowly making the george schmidt thread look like a bastion of respectability
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
Not yet...not enough repetitive Youtube videos. LOL
<<< Maybe it's he whom she should have sued for grandson negligence? >>>
I stand by my comment intended for the famous attorney Jackie Chiles who i have read has already filed the case and is waiting for a trial date.
as things in this unfold and we find out more of what (may have) actually happened it gets harder to think what the end result for Urban Meyer might be.
I would ask a few questions to see if anyone knows the answers.
1.) were the Police involved at any point, and if so, when?
2.) were charges filed or anything done which would make everything publicly available, or was this just an incident between the Smiths that was reported to OSU officials?
3.) if this was a private matter reported to OSU with no Police involvement and Urban Meyer followed protocol, did he act properly to protect Privacy by lying about his knowledge of it?
I agree, and I'm a bigly Meechigan fan.
Vicarious liability? Er, no.
As I recall, she was driving around with it between her legs when it spilled, or at least she alone was the cause of the spill, and did not include the action of an employee. The claim was the temp of coffee made it a defective product.
She was sitting in the passenger seat of her grandsons car while parked
m
Edited
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
Urban Meyer has already admitted he knew and that he reported what he knew. Of course his wife told him. The only question is should he be fired for lying about it. I think coaches lie about pretty much everything so it would be kind of hypocritical to fire him for lying about this but who knows.
As for the McDonald's case the majority of Americans are misinformed about the case. Other than a few folks like Stevek, the rest of America when told the actual facts would side with the jury. McDonald's was clearly in the wrong. There are plenty of examples of frivolous lawsuits, the McDonald's case is not one of them.
Robb
I am not "up to speed" on the Meyer subject. He DID report it? Too bad the victim didn't report it to the police instead of telling her friends.
Agree 100% on McDonalds.
Meyer claims he reported it. He released an "open letter" that essentially served as his defense against a "for cause" firing.
Of course, he also denied knowing about it. So...pick which version you believe.
Courtney Smith did report multiple 2015 incidents to the police.
to answer my own questions...............................
according to a report I read this morning: Powell, Ohio Police Chief Gary Vest states that Zach Smith wasn't charged as a result of anything from 2015. he further states that Privacy laws prevent him from releasing any details to the media.
I heard the gentleman who started all this with his story on the radio state that the Police Report originally said Smith was arrested. He stated the Powell Police Dept. changed the report to say Smith was investigated.
http://www.unisquare.com/store/brick/
Ralph
All these examples are just proving my point that it’s important to wait and get all the facts before idiots start calling for people’s jobs right away.
What winds up happening to Urban will be based purely on whether firing him will cost less money than keeping him. If some sponsors decide to boycott a TV show then hes gone, if a major donor pulls back on money then hes gone. If he is proven innocent but a sponsor pulls back for PR reasons he is gone.