> On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 15:01:56 PST, David Schwartz said:
> > There is simply no way you can argue that McDonald's failed to
> > warn people
> > about the risks. The cup says "hot" on it,
> Actually, the "HOT" on the cup and the sticker in the drive-through that
> says "Warning: Coffee is served
On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 15:01:56 PST, David Schwartz said:
There is simply no way you can argue that McDonald's failed to
warn people
about the risks. The cup says hot on it,
Actually, the HOT on the cup and the sticker in the drive-through that
says Warning: Coffee is served very hot were
On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 15:01:56 PST, David Schwartz said:
> There is simply no way you can argue that McDonald's failed to warn people
> about the risks. The cup says "hot" on it,
Actually, the "HOT" on the cup and the sticker in the drive-through that
says "Warning: Coffee is served very hot" were
> How many of them stuffed the cup between their legs though? I think it
> she would have sqeezed the cup too hard and burned her hand and sued
> McDonalds for that people would be more understainding...
How would what she did have any bearing on the key issue, which is whether
or not McDonald's
On 1/2/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:30:17 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven said:
> > > 2) there had, for a decade prior, been some *700* cases where people
> > > had burned themselves with mcdonald's coffee, so it's not as if
> > > mcdonald's was unaware of
On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:30:17 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven said:
> > > 2) there had, for a decade prior, been some *700* cases where people
> > > had burned themselves with mcdonald's coffee, so it's not as if
> > > mcdonald's was unaware of the danger, yet continued to ignore it.
>
> Given the
On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:30:17 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven said:
2) there had, for a decade prior, been some *700* cases where people
had burned themselves with mcdonald's coffee, so it's not as if
mcdonald's was unaware of the danger, yet continued to ignore it.
Given the population size
On 1/2/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:30:17 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven said:
2) there had, for a decade prior, been some *700* cases where people
had burned themselves with mcdonald's coffee, so it's not as if
mcdonald's was unaware of the danger,
How many of them stuffed the cup between their legs though? I think it
she would have sqeezed the cup too hard and burned her hand and sued
McDonalds for that people would be more understainding...
How would what she did have any bearing on the key issue, which is whether
or not McDonald's
On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 15:01:56 PST, David Schwartz said:
There is simply no way you can argue that McDonald's failed to warn people
about the risks. The cup says hot on it,
Actually, the HOT on the cup and the sticker in the drive-through that
says Warning: Coffee is served very hot were added
10 matches
Mail list logo
