On 04/06/12 18:27, Wjhonson wrote:
> That was a jury award.
> It's common knowledge that juries can be swayed to grant millions of dollars 
> to bloated greedy record labels, or people who got cancer after smoking three 
> packs a day for 20 years.
To which I'll add, McD's had had SEVERAL lawsuits already over serving
"unreasonably hot" coffee.

I'll also add that the victim suffered potentially lethal burns. At
WORST, hot food should be served at a temperature that can cause 1st
degree (ie minor) burns. Defined as "burns that will damage the skin".
This victim suffered third degree burns - defined as "goes through the
skin to the muscles underneath". And she needed a fair bit of "plastic
surgery" to repair the damage. Not cosmetic surgery. Life-saving
reconstructive surgery.

So in this particular case, the legal system did actually work
reasonably well (by US standards, at least). It couldn't have happened
in the UK - the McD's would have been shut down and the franchisees
jailed for negligence long before this had a chance to happen.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Porter <ropor...@ochsner.org>
> To: U2 Users List <u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org>
> Sent: Mon, Jun 4, 2012 10:21 am
> Subject: Re: [U2] Universe/Unidata in the Cloud
> And they'd never give you $2,860,000 for not realizing coffee is hot and 
> pilling it on your lap... Yes, I know it was re-done for an undisclosed 
> amount. 
> y point is that relying on the court system to be reasonable when it has 
> epeatedly been absurd in their "judgement" (or lack thereof) is short-sighted.
U2-Users mailing list

Reply via email to