McDonalds Coffie

admiral_danielsben · Post by **admiral_danielsben** » 2004-06-02 12:05pm

Thread spilt do to the fact had little to with the orgional topic-Bean

Zac Naloen wrote:They'd get sued for promoting sex before marriage in the states.

You really think we're a bunch of Puritans here?

It depends on the state. They'll do that in Tennessee or Utah (which happen to also be two of the only 3 'dry' states). but it'll sell like hotcakes in California or Massachussetts.

Although someone probably will sue. This is the US, litigation capital of the world, where a woman can sue McDonalds for spilling coffee on her dress.[

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-06-02 09:57pm

Although someone probably will sue. This is the US, litigation capital of the world, where a woman can sue McDonalds for spilling coffee on her dress.

That is THE most mismaligned case in the legal history of this fucking country. Do a bit of research on it.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-06-02 10:46pm

HemlockGrey wrote:
Although someone probably will sue. This is the US, litigation capital of the world, where a woman can sue McDonalds for spilling coffee on her dress.
That is THE most mismaligned case in the legal history of this fucking country. Do a bit of research on it.

To expand: McDonals was, as a policy, heating its coffee well in excess of the legally defined safety temperatures, and the lady was able to win because the severity of her burns were greater than had McDonalds not heated the coffee to that temperature. Thus there wre certain damages to the person when there shouldn't have been. McDonalds was to blame for the injury.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2004-06-02 11:08pm

kojikun wrote:To expand: McDonals was, as a policy, heating its coffee well in excess of the legally defined safety temperatures, and the lady was able to win because the severity of her burns were greater than had McDonalds not heated the coffee to that temperature. Thus there wre certain damages to the person when there shouldn't have been. McDonalds was to blame for the injury.

That's absurd, there was no legally designed limit, at least none that I can find. People like their coffee hot, and when they take it out, they'd like it hot when they get home. The coffee was sold as advertised, and there was no malfunction with the container. It was Liebeck's fault for fooling around with a hot liquid between her legs while in an automobile. No matter what bullshit the trail lawyer apologist may feed you, it was a frivilious lawsuit.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-06-03 01:39am

There damn well should be. Damn it if you use too hot water then you're going to burn the coffee and/or overextract. And if you use too cold water you're going to under extract.

It should be between 195 and 205.