Philando Castillo - settlement reached

[Nesikep]

I gotta laugh at the canadian one.. spelled sideways to make you spill it!

 

[boondocks]

I think the incarceration rate of blacks is a bit of a vicious cycle.. Many are in poor neighborhoods, and in those neighborhoods crime is high, parenting is low, so at a young age they get busted for shoplifting, then maybe it's dealing, they have a record, and nothing around for gainful employment, so the cycle continues.. It's not that it's impossible to get out of it, it's just that the majority cannot... I don't think anything is really going to change it, government programs will certainly successfully spend money trying though.

If you look into the McDonalds coffee lawsuit, you might find that it's less ridiculous than it sounds.. It was right on the cusp of boiling, far hotter than what "hot coffee" ever is.. Most hot tap water is only 140F for the very reason that much hotter than that and severe burns happen far too quickly

Good points on both issues, Nesi. White kids (especially if well-to-do) get a "pass" for youthful hijinks and crimes. Heck, a high school girl (where we used to live) plowed into one of my son's classmates with serious injuries resulting to the pedestrian. The driver was high but got off light. Lots of similar stories. I know from my volunteer work which took me into in black urban neighborhoods that those kids do NOT get a free pass.

 

[True Grit Farms]

I think the incarceration rate of blacks is a bit of a vicious cycle.. Many are in poor neighborhoods, and in those neighborhoods crime is high, parenting is low, so at a young age they get busted for shoplifting, then maybe it's dealing, they have a record, and nothing around for gainful employment, so the cycle continues.. It's not that it's impossible to get out of it, it's just that the majority cannot... I don't think anything is really going to change it, government programs will certainly successfully spend money trying though.

If you look into the McDonalds coffee lawsuit, you might find that it's less ridiculous than it sounds.. It was right on the cusp of boiling, far hotter than what "hot coffee" ever is.. Most hot tap water is only 140F for the very reason that much hotter than that and severe burns happen far too quickly

Good points on both issues, Nesi. White kids (especially if well-to-do) get a "pass" for youthful hijinks and crimes. Heck, a high school girl (where we used to live) plowed into one of my son's classmates with serious injuries resulting to the pedestrian. The driver was high but got off light. Lots of similar stories. I know from my volunteer work which took me into in black urban neighborhoods that those kids do NOT get a free pass.

It's not the skin color it's the thickness of the wallet, some people just don't get it.

 

[hurleyjd]

And ever since the McDonalds fiasco, it's nearly impossible in the USA to get a cup of hot coffee as it was intended to be served...

Right after the accident the woman asked for $20000 and McDonalds refused. The woman lawyered up and was rewarded 2.8 million. But here is the rest of the story. The trial judge reduced the final verdict to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided. This amount would be about the same profit McDonalds makes in a day on coffee sales.

 

[TennesseeTuxedo]

And ever since the McDonalds fiasco, it's nearly impossible in the USA to get a cup of hot coffee as it was intended to be served...

Right after the accident the woman asked for $20000 and McDonalds refused. The woman lawyered up and was rewarded 2.8 million. But here is the rest of the story. The trial judge reduced the final verdict to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided. This amount would be about the same profit McDonalds makes in a day on coffee sales.

So in your convoluted way of thinking McDonald's got what they deserved I suppose?

 

[hurleyjd]

And ever since the McDonalds fiasco, it's nearly impossible in the USA to get a cup of hot coffee as it was intended to be served...

Right after the accident the woman asked for $20000 and McDonalds refused. The woman lawyered up and was rewarded 2.8 million. But here is the rest of the story. The trial judge reduced the final verdict to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided. This amount would be about the same profit McDonalds makes in a day on coffee sales.

So in your convoluted way of thinking McDonald's got what they deserved I suppose?

I think your are the convoluted one here quit trolling me please. A lot of people thinks she got 2.8 million. Big Jury awards usually are negotiated down after the award. The judge can change it and also the attorneys in the cases to avoid any delay can negotiate down and usually there is a privacy clause and no one every knows what the settlement was for. You seem to missed the wagon when it came to being smart.

 

[Nesikep]

It's not hard to get the facts about the case
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v ... estaurants

There were 100's of other burn victims, and McDonalds did nothing to improve safety, THAT is what the jury was upset about.. Since then, they've redesigned the cups and lids as well to reduce the chances of spills

 

[greybeard]

100s of people that didn't know coffee was hot?
They been freeze dried their whole lives or just doing hard time?

I shoulda sued my mama..she served me oatmeal one time that burned my tongue.
BAD MOMMY---BAD!!!

play stupid games...win stupid prizes.
morons abound.

 

[Son of Butch]

Did mama collect payment from you in exchange for goods/oatmeal?
or Were you a little freeloading beggar?
In which case the well known common law "Beggars can't be choosers" would apply.

 

[TennesseeTuxedo]

Right after the accident the woman asked for $20000 and McDonalds refused. The woman lawyered up and was rewarded 2.8 million. But here is the rest of the story. The trial judge reduced the final verdict to $640,000, and the parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided. This amount would be about the same profit McDonalds makes in a day on coffee sales.

So in your convoluted way of thinking McDonald's got what they deserved I suppose?

I think your are the convoluted one here quit trolling me please. A lot of people thinks she got 2.8 million. Big Jury awards usually are negotiated down after the award. The judge can change it and also the attorneys in the cases to avoid any delay can negotiate down and usually there is a privacy clause and no one every knows what the settlement was for. You seem to missed the wagon when it came to being smart.

Not trolling you at all little man. The so called victim didn't deserve a dime for her ignorance. You on the other hand...

 

[Jogeephus]

Private businesses don't have a chance in this litigious society we live in. Either your coffee is not cold or your fried chicken is not hot - you just can't win.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/new ... story.html

 

[skyhightree1]

play stupid games...win stupid prizes.
morons abound.

GB I love that :clap: :tiphat:

 

[Son of Butch]

McDonald's coffee case... I wasn't on the jury, so don't know the facts... but I do remember headline about them losing
I Just assumed either McDonald's couldn't afford good attorneys .... or they were definitely in the wrong

 

[Nesikep]

I always mocked that case too.. until I actually read a really good writeup about it... unfortunately I didn't save the link... While still ridiculous, it did make much more sense after

 

[boondocks]

I always mocked that case too.. until I actually read a really good writeup about it... unfortunately I didn't save the link... While still ridiculous, it did make much more sense after

Here's a factual write-up, from the trial and case materials:
The critical points (bolding is mine):

"Burn incident

On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee from the drive-through window of a local McDonald's restaurant located at 5001 Gibson Boulevard S.E. Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of her grandson's Ford Probe, which didn't have cup holders, and her grandson Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. Liebeck placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap.[9] Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin.[10]

Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[11] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (9 kg, nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her to 83 pounds (38 kg).[12] Two years of medical treatment followed.
Pre-trial

Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for $20,000 to cover her actual and anticipated expenses. Her past medical expenses were $10,500; her anticipated future medical expenses were approximately $2,500; and her loss of income was approximately $5,000 for a total of approximately $18,000.[13] Instead, the company offered only $800. When McDonald's refused to raise its offer, Liebeck retained Texas attorney Reed Morgan. Morgan filed suit in New Mexico District Court accusing McDonald's of "gross negligence" for selling coffee that was "unreasonably dangerous" and "defectively manufactured". McDonald's refused Morgan's offer to settle for $90,000.[2] Morgan offered to settle for $300,000, and a mediator suggested $225,000 just before trial, but McDonald's refused these final pre-trial attempts to settle.[2]
Trial and verdict

The trial took place from August 8–17, 1994, before New Mexico District Court Judge Robert H. Scott.[14] During the case, Liebeck's attorneys discovered that McDonald's required franchisees to serve coffee at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C). At that temperature, the coffee would cause a third-degree burn in two to seven seconds. Liebeck's attorney argued that coffee should never be served hotter than 140 °F (60 °C), and that a number of other establishments served coffee at a substantially lower temperature than McDonald's. Liebeck's lawyers presented the jury with evidence that 180 °F (82 °C) coffee like that McDonald's served may produce third-degree burns (where skin grafting is necessary) in about 12 to 15 seconds. Lowering the temperature to 160 °F (71 °C) would increase the time for the coffee to produce such a burn to 20 seconds. Liebeck's attorneys argued that these extra seconds could provide adequate time to remove the coffee from exposed skin, thereby preventing many burns. McDonald's claimed that the reason for serving such hot coffee in its drive-through windows was that those who purchased the coffee typically were commuters who wanted to drive a distance with the coffee; the high initial temperature would keep the coffee hot during the trip.[2] However, the company's own research showed that some customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving.[3]

Other documents obtained from McDonald's showed that from 1982 to 1992 the company had received more than 700 reports of people burned by McDonald's coffee to varying degrees of severity, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000.[2] McDonald's quality control manager, Christopher Appleton, testified that this number of injuries was insufficient to cause the company to evaluate its practices. He argued that all foods hotter than 130 °F (54 °C) constituted a burn hazard, and that restaurants had more pressing dangers to warn about. The plaintiffs argued that Appleton conceded that McDonald's coffee would burn the mouth and throat if consumed when served.[15]

A twelve-person jury reached its verdict on August 18, 1994.[14] Applying the principles of comparative negligence, the jury found that McDonald's was 80% responsible for the incident and Liebeck was 20% at fault. Though there was a warning on the coffee cup, the jury decided that the warning was neither large enough nor sufficient. They awarded Liebeck US$200,000 in compensatory damages, which was then reduced by 20% to $160,000. In addition, they awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages. The jurors apparently arrived at this figure from Morgan's suggestion to penalize McDonald's for one or two days' worth of coffee revenues, which were about $1.35 million per day.[2] The judge reduced punitive damages to $480,000, three times the compensatory amount, for a total of $640,000. The decision was appealed by both McDonald's and Liebeck in December 1994, but the parties settled out of court for an undisclosed amount less than $600,000.[16] http://www.gutenberg.us/articles/stella ... orporation