McDonald’s once again sued after customer burns herself on hot coffee
McDonald’s once again sued after customer burns herself on hot coffee
McDonald’s is being sued over a hot coffee spill, again.
McDonald’s is being sued over a hot coffee spill, again.
This time, a San Francisco location is being accused of serving a “scalding” cup of coffee with an improperly attached lid, which allegedly resulted in the coffee pouring out on plaintiff Mable Childress’ body and causing “severe burns” after she tried drinking it.
The lawsuit, filed last week, alleged that the elderly woman is suffering from “physical pains, emotional distress and other damages.” The restaurant’s negligence was a “substantial factor” for her injuries, it alleged.
Childress also said in the lawsuit that the restaurant employees “refused” to help her, a point that the McDonald’s denied.
In case anyone still has misconceptions about the famous case that came before. McDonald's spun public opinion, but she had a legitimate case. https://youtu.be/Q9DXSCpcz9E
Beat me to it. I remember as a teenager hearing adults laugh about this, “how could you not know coffee is hot?? Hahaha”. Holy shit the McDonalds PR really fucked that lady over. It wasn’t until at least a decade later that I learned the reality of the situation and how horrific her burns were.
Fuck McDonalds.
Just want to add that this wasn't just McDonald's spinning it for their own purposes, it was part of a larger effort of tort reform - spreading the conception that people are suing for everything, even hot coffee hur dur, so that the public would support things like caps on pain and suffering damages and punitive damages. Corporations wanted more leeway to maximize profits(the reason McDonald's coffee was so hot was because they could get more coffee out of the beans that way), even if it hurt people, and the public jumped right on board. This was part of the same strategy as denigrating plaintiffs attorneys as "ambulance chasers" and the like. It got to the point that even when people were harmed, they still wouldn't sue because they didn't want to be lumped in with "those entitled people suing over everything". It became a point of pride to get fucked over by corporations and to do nothing about it. Really disgusting how easily the public was manipulated by all that.
"Fused labia"
The name of my garrage band.
Aka hot enough to weld flesh together.
I'm not going to watch the video since the case was covered in both my business law and ethics courses, but absolutely do not look up the images of her injury.
It's brutal.
What I don't understand is how she was appealed down to $480K, but the family in FL got $800K for not warning that the nuggets were fresh out of the fryer. The former was way, way, worse.
What's nuts is that she originally only asked for like $32k to cover the cost of the fucking skin grafts she needed.
The only thing I can think of is maybe the '91 case wasn't adjusted for inflation? That would make it a little over 1 mil today
Tl;dr: the burn fused part of her vulva, and they didn’t want to pay medical costs.
I just corrected someone about that last month who was using it as complaint about society. They had no idea about the details.
McDonald’s should be considered guilty unless proven innocent given their track record. Nail em to the wall lady!
They were guilty of making coffee to hot years ago. I have no idea how they were sued for 800k off of selling removeden tenders that were still hot.
Edit: Is the term chicken actually sensored? Appears it shows now, strange
I don't think "burns herself" is quite the turn of phrase I would've chosen but then I don't like the taste of boot leather so... yeah.
Permanently Deleted
"Is burned by" rather than "burns self," it's that easy
Doesn't matter, if you hand someone a cup with a lid on it you expect the lid is secured you aught to check anyway but still. If they simply have her a cup and a lid and she spilled somewhere in the process of putting one onto the other they wouldn't be responsible.
I'm honestly surprised this doesn't happen more often than it does, considering how much coffee McD's sells.
They're supposed to serve it at a safe temperature, and they usually do.
tbh I'm not sure how they managed to overclock their coffee maker. Did they just heat it up on the stove?
Yep, wife used to work for Starbucks. You're supposed to check/calibrate the thermostat on the machine on a regular basis so you get the coffee hot but not boiling, third degree burns hot. For whatever reason, it has to be done because the thermostats will gradually deviate from their initial settings. If you fail to check your thermostats, eventually someone's going to burn the fuck out of themselves with a hot drink. Water, which is the main ingredient in any coffee product, has an enormous heat capacity, and will absolutely fuck your shit up before you have a chance to do anything about it.
IIRC, McDonald's was either deliberately tampering with their thermostats or just failing to check them when that famous case went down, which was how they were found to be negligent.
I don't think I understand how it can be hotter than 100 celcius.
I'm not defending McDonald's here, they can rot.
Like, coffee is mostly water, and water boils at atmospheric pressure at 100c. Milk boils slightly more than 100. I guess the lid would pressurise the steam a little? Maybe the coffee grinds hold the heat far more than the water? I wouldn't have thought it would be diluted too much to make a difference.
I guess this is a stupid question, because it happened. But how can boiling water cause third degree burns in the quantity of 500ml? I thought it'd have to be much more than that and very prolonged?
This person likely doesn't have a case. The reason McD lost the first coffee case was because at the time they were offering free coffee refills, so they cranked up the temperature so people wouldn't have time to sit and drink multiple cups.
Dozens of people had already been injured by this practice by the point the famous injury happened, and the courts had already warned McD to stop.
Your ignorance of the nuanced details of the case is showing
background: podcast episode about the McDonalds Hot Coffee Case on You're Wrong About
The real question is why would anyone still get coffee at McDonalds?
Up in Canada (at least my part), McDonald's coffee is a great affordable coffee. It's better than Starbucks or (🤮) Tim Hortons. It's not going to compete with a bespoke artisan coffee shop that squeezes cat butt glands or whatever justifies selling a $5 cup for $10, but it's better than almost everything else for the price.
Yeah I read that is a common option. Can't believe that from where I'm from, decent coffee joints are all over. Nobody I know would go to McDonald's for coffee
coffee shop that squeezes cat butt glands or whatever justifies selling a $5 cup for $10
The cost is twofold, justified by having:
1- actual quality cherries, grown and dried in a labor intensive ways by farmers actually making real money directly off of the sale of their coffee and-
2- small, local coffee Roasters actually taking care of the roast on a coffee you want to taste while also getting paid for their hard work.
That probably sounds fucking snobby as hell but it really makes a difference that is hard to ignore once you start tasting it.
No butt glands involved, feline or otherwise.
The town I live in has 2 Tims, 1 McDonald's, and no cafes. I never considered how deeply it would eventually hurt leaving a place with quality cafes and restaurants for a place without. At this point we're considering on just moving to an unorganized township because there's no point in paying the higher property taxes (there's a long list of complaints to go with that nugget).
It's fairly cheap for getting coffee out and it's better than Starbucks coffee. Sure, go to a cafe if you have the means, but many don't.
You can usually get it for a dollar with the app and it's better than a lot of the stuff that can be made at home with an automatic coffee maker. I used to get it a lot until I could afford to support smaller coffee places
At least in Toronto, it's one of the better options.
Montreal too. Before I got into specialty coffee (which is altogether another thing) I was pretty much only drinking mc-d's in the mornings. There's no real grocery store option for at home pour over that compares either.
Last time I visited the US, McDonalds and Dunkin' Donuts was easy places to get coffee on the road that wasn't see through, like pure water, or tasted like shit
As far as widely available (especially in BFE where it's this or a shitty gas station) it's decent coffee. I'd say it's better than Starbucks, mostly because Starbucks coffee is terrible. Almost no big chain gives you coffee worth the $5 of whatever they charge.
so you can sue McDonalds
it's like playing Lotto, but you also get a Coffee to it
Who doesn't like coffee hotter than the surface of the sun?
Click for a humorous take of coffee at the arches.
Although I think maybe it's a move by their marketing department - bad news is still publicity.
Wonder how long before the “Stella awards” start mysteriously showing up all over social media again.
Pathetic.
Childress also said in the lawsuit that the restaurant employees “refused” to help her, a point that the McDonald’s denied.
What aid did she expect the minimum wage mc donalds workers to provide? They could have handed her napkins and called an ambulance but I'm pretty sure providing first aid is well outside their job description and training. Even then, first aid for burns would just be removing any clothing covering the burned area (that isn't stuck to the wound) and then running cold water over the area. Then, depending on the extent and degree of the burns, you get them to a hospital. I'm not sure if this is another 3rd degree burns "fused labia" situation, but if it is then the article really glossed over that fact.
Maybe she expected them to act like human beings, but apparently that's too much to ask.
And do what? That's what I'm asking. What was she expecting them to do that they didn't do? What actual action did she expect them to take that they didn't take? What is "acting like a human" in this situation?
You're implying that these people were being selfish assholes but I can't think of anything they could have done. Yes this lady is now covered in hot coffee. The employees can't just magic that coffee off of her, even though I'm sure they wished they could have in that moment. They have napkins available. That's the only means they had available to remove the coffee short of stripping an old woman in a mcdonalds which would have opened them up to all sorts of other problems. As I said in my origional post, they could have given her napkins and called an ambulance. You can't just undo a coffee spill and there is very little you can do for large burns in the field.
I used to get mad at chinese people in those videos when someone got brutally injured and no one helped...know why? the family of the 'victim' can and often does sue any citizen or civilian who aids in another for help. How fucking crazy is that....But it happens, it's real and China is just a microcosm of the issue. Every country has different rules for helping someone, every state, every county, every town. Most people are going to choose the 'safe' option. Move along and be glad it wasnt them. The ones who do help risk a lot...no good deed goes unpunished. humans are weird. 🙁
women ☕
Permanently Deleted
Obvious money grab.
How's that corporate boot taste?
Yep. I doubt her fucking labia were fused together. The first case was a real issue and McD was clearly in the wrong. This one? McDonalds + hot coffee spill != automatic money.