O'Melveny & Myers (the law firm where that author used to practice as an attorney) will be interested to hear that he knows nothing about the law.
They might be interested to know that he doesn't see a problem with lying about what laws mean then, since he is quite clearly wrong on several points.
Prolonged contact? My first numbers, I admit, were off. However, it takes less then two seconds at the temperature that coffee was.
Chibi Merrow said: Well, personally, I wouldn't drink coffee that hot. That's why I either 1) let it oool or 2) mix cold milk into it. Like a sensible person. And when I spill coffee on my hand (which I often do ascending/descending stairs) I don't blame the barista for serving it to me so hot. I'm happy that it's that hot so that when I get back to my office it's still warm. At no point do I put it near anything I value (such as my laptop or genitals [not necessarily in that order]) that could be sensitive to its heat and/or wetness. Carrying hot coffee in between one's legs does not deserve $630k. It deserves the expected result of removing one's self from the breeding population. Unfortunately, being 79, we were probably too late...
--
-Merrow
Had you spilt it on yourself while going downstairs you'd be in hospital right now, since I doubt you could: Realise what had happened, figure out what to do, then strip in anything less then 5 seconds. Yet you'd have no issue with the resulting hospitalization? None at all? You'd accept that it's perfectly fine for something to be sold at a temperature that causes permanent, irreversible, and potentially deadly (Certainly very disabling) injuries after brief contact, because some customers might possibly like it that hot?
That link has been thrown around quite a bit during this discussion, most people's interpretation: That guy knows nothing about the law.(He doesn't even seem to know what Punitive damages are, which I learnt about in grade 11.) He also seems to have quite a few facts that go against the official record.
When was the last time pizza gave you a third-degree burn and sent you to the hospital for two years? If it did, would you sue? I'd assume so, what with you losing all sense of taste for the rest of your life.
Actually, I have to ask this: Do you know what a 3rd degree burn is? That means that the skin in the area, all of it, is dead. Please tell me who would want to drink coffee that would burn their tongue so badly that it could never be used again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_degree_burn
Not quite, the coffee was hot enough to give third degree burns in well under a second. Unless she could somehow phase out of her clothes the instant the coffee spilt the burn was inevitable.
Let me put it this way: When you buy Pizza, you expect it to be hot, but still cool enough to eat, if not right away, then fairly soon, right? So, one day you buy a pizza, open the box, grab a slice, and pull back suddenly, that Pizza is HOT, so hot, in fact, that you get a 3rd degree burn from it.
Would you sue the pizza company for your medical expenses? I would, I do expect pizza to be hot, but not hot enough to destroy any flesh that touches it. Better yet, it's revealed that the Pizza at that store is kept 50 degrees hotter then what every other store keeps it at (The coffee at McDonalds was about 50 degrees F hotter then what regulations consider safe.) and then the store offers to only pay you a few hundred dollars to keep you quiet.
Do you honestly advocate the position that the woman was conducting a frivolous lawsuit after you stop and actually think about it?
Slashdot Mirror
O'Melveny & Myers (the law firm where that author used to practice as an attorney) will be interested to hear that he knows nothing about the law. They might be interested to know that he doesn't see a problem with lying about what laws mean then, since he is quite clearly wrong on several points. Prolonged contact? My first numbers, I admit, were off. However, it takes less then two seconds at the temperature that coffee was. Chibi Merrow said: Well, personally, I wouldn't drink coffee that hot. That's why I either 1) let it oool or 2) mix cold milk into it. Like a sensible person. And when I spill coffee on my hand (which I often do ascending/descending stairs) I don't blame the barista for serving it to me so hot. I'm happy that it's that hot so that when I get back to my office it's still warm. At no point do I put it near anything I value (such as my laptop or genitals [not necessarily in that order]) that could be sensitive to its heat and/or wetness. Carrying hot coffee in between one's legs does not deserve $630k. It deserves the expected result of removing one's self from the breeding population. Unfortunately, being 79, we were probably too late... -- -Merrow Had you spilt it on yourself while going downstairs you'd be in hospital right now, since I doubt you could: Realise what had happened, figure out what to do, then strip in anything less then 5 seconds. Yet you'd have no issue with the resulting hospitalization? None at all? You'd accept that it's perfectly fine for something to be sold at a temperature that causes permanent, irreversible, and potentially deadly (Certainly very disabling) injuries after brief contact, because some customers might possibly like it that hot?
That link has been thrown around quite a bit during this discussion, most people's interpretation: That guy knows nothing about the law.(He doesn't even seem to know what Punitive damages are, which I learnt about in grade 11.) He also seems to have quite a few facts that go against the official record. When was the last time pizza gave you a third-degree burn and sent you to the hospital for two years? If it did, would you sue? I'd assume so, what with you losing all sense of taste for the rest of your life. Actually, I have to ask this: Do you know what a 3rd degree burn is? That means that the skin in the area, all of it, is dead. Please tell me who would want to drink coffee that would burn their tongue so badly that it could never be used again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_degree_burn
Not quite, the coffee was hot enough to give third degree burns in well under a second. Unless she could somehow phase out of her clothes the instant the coffee spilt the burn was inevitable. Let me put it this way: When you buy Pizza, you expect it to be hot, but still cool enough to eat, if not right away, then fairly soon, right? So, one day you buy a pizza, open the box, grab a slice, and pull back suddenly, that Pizza is HOT, so hot, in fact, that you get a 3rd degree burn from it. Would you sue the pizza company for your medical expenses? I would, I do expect pizza to be hot, but not hot enough to destroy any flesh that touches it. Better yet, it's revealed that the Pizza at that store is kept 50 degrees hotter then what every other store keeps it at (The coffee at McDonalds was about 50 degrees F hotter then what regulations consider safe.) and then the store offers to only pay you a few hundred dollars to keep you quiet. Do you honestly advocate the position that the woman was conducting a frivolous lawsuit after you stop and actually think about it?