OrionTheWolf
Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006 Status: offline
|
Well a jury, judge and several reviews do not believe it is ridiculous, if you actually take the facts into account and not just the headline. The woman originally just wanted her medical bills covered, from the second and I believe third degree burns she suffered. I have never seen coffee that hot normally. The mediator before it went to trial, which I believe was a former judge himself, advised McDonalds that they just settle for the medical coverage, McDonalds relied upon people not looking at the evidence and saying "it s ridiculous". I do not want to stray too far off the OP, so if you want to discuss this further Cmail me or we can start another topic. quote:
ORIGINAL: Alumbrado quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf You should look at the law review concerning that McDonalds case. quote:
ORIGINAL: BrigandDoom It never ceases to amaze how far some of this tripe goes, McDonalds having to put "this contains hot liquids" onto coffee cups as some prat scalded themselves is sheer madness. Unfortunately the UK is going the way of the Us with ambulance chasing solicitors making people lives a misery. At one time if you'd split hot coffee on yourself and you tried to sue the beak (judge) would've thrown the case out as vexatious and asked the litigant if they needed a wet nurse to help them live their lives! The trouble these days, no-one ever fucks up, its always someone elses fault! People really need to get a poster child for ridiculous lawsuits that was actually ridiculous. Like this one
_____________________________
When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."
|