700 in ten years, or 70 incidents a year at apx. 13,000 McDonald's restaurants in the US? That's below noise level.

I agree with you, Perth, in that the coffee was served too hot. But the woman put the coffee between her knees...that's just asking for trouble, IMO.

(Though I don't understand why McDonald's didn't just settle up front...$20K? That's peanuts for them.)

I agree, and I think she should have shared more than 20% of the blame, say 50%. But the point is, i guess, that when you go to a restaurant and are served food and beverages, it's reasonable to expect that the item is immediately fit for consumption. Everything on the McDonald's menu is like that, with the lone exception of coffee (well, I guess thats fixed now).

You can argue that people aren't going to drink their coffee in the car, and it has time to cool down (despite the fact that this is coffee from the same pot served to eat-in customers). McD's did.
And that flew like a brick.

Place responsibility where it belongs. Yes, the plaintiff was to blame for doing something so stupid, but I'll say it again. That coffee was too goddamned hot. Not fit for consumption.

Re: We all knew this was coming
 

One problem. Nudity is healthy. Fear of nudity, promoted by religious extremists, then promotes further unfounded fears - such as fear of mythical WMDs.

Re: Re: We all knew this was coming
 

Wise words. :D

Re: Re: We all knew this was coming
 

Depends on who is nude. :D

I think the hot coffee situation is 'gonna have to agree to disagree'...

I compare it to fireworks. Fireworks go bang. If handled properly, nobody gets hurt. Screw up, and you might get serious burns. It is all in how you handle it. Mishandle a cup of coffee, get burned.

To me, it is the same as saying 'that firecracker shouldn't have exploded with sufficient force to harm me just because I used it improperly.'

And you make a good point. Coffee is suppose to be hot. I guess I just think it doesn't have to be that hot.

Have a fire cracker explode in your hand and only get a numb hand. Have dynamite explode there - something major and different. McDonalds was selling dynamite (or M80) as a fire cracker. They had *hundreds* of previous complaints and did nothing - absoutely nothing.

Its not difficult to turn down the temperature. Only when dollar value was seen by executives, did the executives finally decide to study the problem. What did they do? Brew coffee as the coffee industry recommended.

Major difference between a product that burns 'through' muscle and one that only burns (and does not remove) skin. Appreciate the difference. McDonalds had been informed of the danger multiple times and did nothing. It was not just a cup of coffee. They were selling something that would not just burn skin off. Their coffee was so excessively hot as to destroy muscle. That is a major difference of 50 degrees.

I also profited from a necessary lawsuit. McDonald's coffee was brewed so hot to be full of acids and oils. So bad that only one cup of coffee gave me a headache similar to that from drug addict smokers. Once MacDonalds lowered the temperature, then McDonalds coffee actually was drinkable. But look what it took to get a decent cup of coffee? Classic problem when an MBA is the bean counter.

McDonalds knew that it was a problem, they had researched it and been sued over it, but they did not fix it. Why not? It was a few cents cheaper if they didn't cool down the coffee to the recommended drinking temperature before serving. Added together, those few cents saved more than paid for the lawsuits that McDonald's suffered over the hot coffee.

They endangered a lot of people for a few cents per cup profit. Why shouldn't the corporation be expected to show some responsibility?

Why would anyone drink McDonald's coffee anyway? It tastes like shit, IMO.

dunkin donuts is just as friggin hot, too

i have to wait at least 1/2 hr before i drink it....why can't they all just be wawa?

Just for S&Gs, while I was brewing a pot of tea today (yes, I do sometimes drink tea instead of coffee, just not that often, because it's not convenient to do at work, since I don't have a stove or electric kettle there, and microwaving for teabags just doesn't seem proper, and it never comes out tasting right) ...

I checked the temp on the tea at the conclusion of steeping ... 'twas 185°F. When the tea hits the leaves initially, it's at boiling temperature ... has to be, for the correct flavor release.

Oh, and I started drinking it right away. How is it that something that's perfectly acceptable for contact with an area of the body which has less damageresistance than the upper thighs that immediate damage does not occur?

I also found myself wondering what the internal temperature of a whale penis might be.

There's a "fact sheet" that a lot of McDonalds case debunkers read from. Problem with the "fact sheet" is it's from the American Trial Lawyers Association, which is a bit biased.

Here's a "fact sheet" put together by me, a much more reliable source.

1) Coffee has to be brewed between 185 and 205 degrees for proper flavor. 140 degrees (which is hot tap water) and you've got brown water.

2) Seven hundred complaints in 10 years from a company which serves billions of cups a week is not significant.

3) It's easier to let hot coffee cool than to heat up cold coffee.

4) If you're an old lady, even 140 degree water will give you third degree burns. Sucks to be old.

5) "The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin." So sue the sweatpant manufacturer too.

Not true. Some of the best tea is sun tea? Brewed only in the heat of sun. Being brewed cooler, it does not leach out the bad things into tea.

Dognuts does serve their coffee too hot. Standard procedure is to ask for ice cubes. They even have cups for the ice requests because so many people must ask for ice.

Yes hot coffee will burn skin, even on old ladies in sweat pants. But even hot coffee in sweat pants should not remove muscle. That detail is the major difference between MacDonalds old coffee and current coffee. It took a lawsuit to fix defective MacDonalds management.

Underlying this discussion is the question of jury verdicts. After the trial, I took this complaint to the judge. Jury is denied any written facts. Jury cannot even have a written copy of the Judge's charge - the directions necessary to form a verdict. Judge said the state Supreme Court says they don't want a jury to have information. Lawyers fear that a smart jury member will use written facts to manipulate the jury (as the Judge explained that Supreme Court decision). And so we found ourselves making decisions only on perceived and therefore emotionally biased facts. We even invented a dollar number only because it sounded good. Facts or logical basis on which that number was created - be damned. We just kept running the number up as if it was an auction - without any facts to base a number on.

MacDonalds verdict is hyped by self serving corporations rather than addressing a real problem in jury trials. Jury is denied basic written material necessary to make a decision - such as trial transcripts. We could not even take notes. We had to invent from memory the seven requirements in that jury charge because those seven necessary facts (from the charge) were not permitted inside the jury room.

MacDonalds got its just due. But lawyers fear to trust a jury with specific facts. More important to have a jury's 'feelings' rather than the fact dominate a jury deliberation. Does an OJ Simpson trial come to mind?