[rescue] McDonald's facts rather than Conservative Urban Myths

[Kyle Webb]

At 04:39 PM 11/27/2001 +0000, you wrote:


>Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of
>her grandson's car when she was severely burned by McDonalds' coffee in
>February 1992.  Liebeck, 79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served
>in a styrofoam cup at the drivethrough window of a local McDonalds.


Yep. The one on Central Ave just south of the University. Been there many 
times when I lived in Albuquerque.


>After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and
>stopped momentarily

Blocking the narrow drive that the drive thru goes thru, I'm sure. I've had 
to wait behind suchlike many times as you usually can't get around them to 
exit back to Central Ave. That wins no sympathy from me.

>so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her
>coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often
>charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in
>motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.)  Liebeck placed
>the cup between her knees


Bad move, but I fail to see how McDs prompted her to do it.

>  and attempted to remove the plastic lid from
>the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled
>into her lap.


Which was completely not the fault of McDs.


>The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next
>to her skin.


Unfortunate, but again not the fault of McDs. Perhaps by the logic of all 
this, a suit against the sweatpants manufacturer would have been in order 
too for allowing retention of high temperature fluids (grrrr.). As an 
aside, the elderly tend to be more susceptible to burns. Again, 
unfortunate, but not the fault of McDs.

So, the thesis is that all liability belongs to McDs because of the 
temperature of the coffee, and none because of the stupidity of the 
plaintiff. Yeah... Uh huh...

The general opinion of Albuquerque residents I talked to was that the suit 
was utter crap.
The idea that because McDs lowered the coffee temperature this is proof of 
liability is an excercise in faulty logic that would bring derision in any 
reasonable setting. Of course they did. They were getting hit with a BS 
lawsuit and it was defensive against copycat suits.

Not that I have strong opinions about this one... ;)

Kyle Webb