stapeltonj:
Frankly speaking, I'm glad the thing got overturned on appeal.
"First the lady had third-degree burns in her vaginal area."
If I remember from my boyscout handbook, thrid-degree burns imply charred skin, and or the removal of skin. My mother-in-law had to pour an entire port of boling water over her arm to even get to that point. So, that must have been one helluva cup of coffee. The best I've ever gotten was a blister from hot water.
Then again, I'm not a doctor.
My grandfather used to literally pour coffee out of the still bubbling perculator into a cup, and then drink it right away - damndest thing I ever saw. I honest to God don't think he actually had any tastebuds in his mouth (which might have explained how he tolerated my grandmother's cooking).
"Second, the offer to settle for medical expenses only was open until the jury came back after the trial. McDonald's offered zero."
They offered zero, perhaps, maybe because they actually weren't at fault? That it's a person's OWN responsibility not to dump hot coffee in their laps?
"Third at trial it was proved that injuries of this sort were occurring on an almost daily basis at McDonald's and they had absolutely no intention of doing anything about it."
Aren't there, like, 20,000 or 30,000 McDonalds in this country? Think that, by sheer numbers alone, you're going to have people spilling hot coffee on themselves? And of all of those people being burned so horribly, virtually no one tried to sue? Maybe it's because, unlike the plaintiff, they recognozed the hot coffee scalds...
"fourth, it was proved a trial that McDonald's intentionally, after brewing, kept their coffee at some 20 to 30° hotter temperature than any other restaurant."
So, no other resturant in America keeps their coffee at the same temperature that McDonalds had? None? I find that a little hard to believe.
Ok, so we're still at the same point I made before: coffee is made from boiling water (and the water in the heating tanks must be less then 212 degrees or else they won't be holding coffee very long). Everyone I know of realizes that boiling water will scald you if you touch it. And coffee, for about 400 years, has been made with boiling water.
I remember seeing this lady - she was definately a senior citizen. Back in the old days, the only way to make coffee was boiling water. That's what perculators were for, and most people her age drank LOTS of coffee. So, she's either the first senior citizen in history to have never drunk coffee that was made with boiling water, and doesn't realize that boing water will burn you, or she's just looking for a nice payoff for her own abject stupidity.
"fifth, the punitive damages awarded (which were overturned on appeal) were the equivalent of two days gross coffee sales at McDonald's. Not two day's gross sales, not two days gross breakfast sales, two days coffee sales."
That's irrelevent. The majority of that 2-days gross sales was the paycheck for a number of McDonalds corporate employees. So, in other words, the jury decided to take away the paychecks from several McDonalds employees to compensate a woman who doesn't get the idea that boiling coffee will burn you if you drop it into your lap.
"No I'm not an ambulance chaser, I am a general practitioner in the majority of my practice is bankruptcy law and domestic law. only about 20% of my firms practice is plaintiff's personal-injury and 99% of that is your simple garden-variety car wreck."
Get in touch with pacman357 - he's a lawyer too.
"I am truly sorry that in the wake of hurricane Katrina insurance companies, who are continuing to rake in profits at record levels as they have for last seven or eight years, have elected to double your insurance premiums, but are you really naïve enough to believe that the level of plaintiff verdicts, which over the last 10 years have not increased faster than the rate of inflation in general (government figures), are the cause for your insurance premium increases?"
Hey man, I'll be the first one to agree that insurance is basically a legalized shell-game. But there are people who time, and time again rip off insurance companies. To think that this has nothing to do with your insurance premiums, is outright absurd. People like to think that large companies rake in extreme profits, and in some instances this is true. But those profits don't get shoved under someone's mattress - it gets invested, distributed to share holders, invested in R & D, and so on. And when you start tapping corporations like a maple Tree for syrup, the end result is an immediate increase in prices.
Now, do I think insurance companies are completely blameless for unjustified rate increases? Absolutely not. But don't tell me that people claiming everything, the kitchen sink, and stuff they never owned as losted property on your insurance forms doesn't kick up rates.
