$8500.00 for hot mashed 'tatoes

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 04:24:07a, -L. wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

What kind of Mother doesn't check the temp of food before handing it
off to their kid?

-L.
****

http://home.hamptonroads.com/s tories/story.cfm?story=90839&r an=40944

"CHESAPEAKE - An $8,500 settlement has been tentatively reached
between
Chili's Grill and Bar and a local mother who alleged her 1-year-old
son was
injured at the restaurant after being served hot mashed potatoes.

One who is either too stupid to even be a mother -or- one who thought a minor
burn would be a ticket to a small fortune. Opportunistic, sue-happy [censored]!

I hope the court either denies the settlment and throws it out, or awards her
a penny!

Like the old woman, Stella Liebeck, who was awarded half a million for
dumping hot coffee in her lap. I'd like to have poured it over her head!

Society should not have to be protected from itself to this extent, nor
should frivolous lawsuits be accepted in a court of law.

Zeesh!

--
Wayne Boatwright *¿*
____________________________________________

My doctor told me to stop having intimate dinners for four,
unless there are three other people.

---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0533-5, 08/20/2005
Tested on: 8/21/2005 5:04:35 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

-L. said:

What kind of Mother doesn't check the temp of food before handing it
off to their kid?

-L.
****

http://home.hamptonroads.com/s tories/story.cfm?story=90839&r an=40944

"CHESAPEAKE - An $8,500 settlement has been tentatively reached
between
Chili's Grill and Bar and a local mother who alleged her 1-year-old
son was
injured at the restaurant after being served hot mashed potatoes.

I'm guessing (just guessing, mind you) she knew the old splash on the wrist
trick if she ever fed the infant warmed formula from a bottle? Hell, I'm
not a mother and even *I* know that. And while we're at it, shouldn't a 1
year old still be fed by mommy with a spoon? I wonder how much she was
seeking in actual damages and additional "pain and suffering" due to the
distress of a red spot requiring (OMG!) burn ointment?

Jill

What stupidity, irresponsibility, laziness and ignorance. Lawsuit
crazy people drive me insane, a rational person would say it an
accident and be done with it. How many parents let a year old child
feed themselves? Much less in a restaurant. I hope the courts say
sorry no award for being an irresponsible parent. It's been quite a
while since I've had a one year old but if memory serves the
coordination to get food to mouth with silverware simply isn't there.

Is this going to add a warning to restaurant menus, food may be hot.
Like the warning many coffee shops have, Warning! Coffee may be hot.
Well it damn well better be unless it's a blazing hot day and I'm
ordering an iced coffee.

Jessica

Wayne Boatwright said:

One who is either too stupid to even be a mother -or- one who thought a minor
burn would be a ticket to a small fortune. Opportunistic, sue-happy [censored]!

Wayne! Such language!!!

Quoted message said:

I hope the court either denies the settlment and throws it out, or awards her
a penny!

Like the old woman, Stella Liebeck, who was awarded half a million for
dumping hot coffee in her lap. I'd like to have poured it over her head!

Quoted message said:

Society should not have to be protected from itself to this extent, nor
should frivolous lawsuits be accepted in a court of law.

Zeesh!

Society? It's a giant corporation and the amount of money involved was a
PITTANCE to them. The only effect the suit had on society was
entertainment 🙂

Wayne, McD's *asked* *for* *the* *lawsuit!* If they had settled for the
$20,000 at the beginning, a very reasonable sum which didn't come close
to the medical costs, there would have been no lawsuit! The
compensatory damages in her case were reduced to $160,000 because the
jury found her 20% responsible for the injuries. That means that
McDonald's was 80% responsible. In addition to the jury's assessment of
McDonald's role, "the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous
and willful."

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

If there's one thing to be learned from the coffee case, which should be
applied to the mashed potatoes case, is that the media loves to play up
this stuff. Remember, there are two sides to every story. The media
reports, especially at the beginning, don't always provide the whole
story, but it does increase their circulation!

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:07:29a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

Wayne Boatwright said:

One who is either too stupid to even be a mother -or- one who thought a
minor burn would be a ticket to a small fortune. Opportunistic,
sue-happy [censored]!

Wayne! Such language!!!

And I would say it again. :-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I hope the court either denies the settlment and throws it out, or
awards her a penny!

Like the old woman, Stella Liebeck, who was awarded half a million for
dumping hot coffee in her lap. I'd like to have poured it over her
head!

Quoted message said:

Society should not have to be protected from itself to this extent, nor
should frivolous lawsuits be accepted in a court of law.

Zeesh!

Society? It's a giant corporation and the amount of money involved was a
PITTANCE to them. The only effect the suit had on society was
entertainment 🙂

Wayne, McD's *asked* *for* *the* *lawsuit!* If they had settled for the
$20,000 at the beginning, a very reasonable sum which didn't come close
to the medical costs, there would have been no lawsuit! The
compensatory damages in her case were reduced to $160,000 because the
jury found her 20% responsible for the injuries. That means that
McDonald's was 80% responsible. In addition to the jury's assessment of
McDonald's role, "the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous
and willful."

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

If there's one thing to be learned from the coffee case, which should be
applied to the mashed potatoes case, is that the media loves to play up
this stuff. Remember, there are two sides to every story. The media
reports, especially at the beginning, don't always provide the whole
story, but it does increase their circulation!

All very true, Sue, but it raises my ire.

People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack thereof.
These types of cases cannot even be compared to those like the Vioxx and
similar cases where there is no way the public can know of the consequences
beforehand.

Has common sense completely flown out the window?

Media and entertainment be damned.

--
Wayne Boatwright *¿*
____________________________________________

My doctor told me to stop having intimate dinners for four,
unless there are three other people.

---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0533-5, 08/20/2005
Tested on: 8/21/2005 6:27:06 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

Wayne Boatwright said:

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:07:29a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Wayne, McD's *asked* *for* *the* *lawsuit!* If they had settled for the
$20,000 at the beginning, a very reasonable sum which didn't come close
to the medical costs, there would have been no lawsuit! The
compensatory damages in her case were reduced to $160,000 because the
jury found her 20% responsible for the injuries. That means that
McDonald's was 80% responsible. In addition to the jury's assessment of
McDonald's role, "the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous
and willful."

Quoted message said:

All very true, Sue, but it raises my ire.

People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack thereof.

And so should corporations. That's what the McDonald's case was about.

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:34:06a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

Wayne Boatwright said:

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:07:29a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Wayne, McD's *asked* *for* *the* *lawsuit!* If they had settled for
the $20,000 at the beginning, a very reasonable sum which didn't come
close to the medical costs, there would have been no lawsuit! The
compensatory damages in her case were reduced to $160,000 because the
jury found her 20% responsible for the injuries. That means that
McDonald's was 80% responsible. In addition to the jury's assessment
of McDonald's role, "the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless,
callous and willful."

Quoted message said:

All very true, Sue, but it raises my ire.

People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack
thereof.

And so should corporations. That's what the McDonald's case was about.

I've never agreed that McDonald's was in any way at fault. Coffee is
supposed to be hot. Adults ordering coffee should have the expectation
that it will be hot and know how to handle it. The plaintiff's actions
were "reckless", given that she knew she had a cup of hot coffee.

When I purchase a carryout beverage, hot or cold, the first thing I do is
check that the lid is secure, if for no other reason that not having it
spill all over my car.

--
Wayne Boatwright *¿*
____________________________________________

My doctor told me to stop having intimate dinners for four,
unless there are three other people.

---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0533-5, 08/20/2005
Tested on: 8/21/2005 6:46:35 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 09:34:06 -0400, Curly Sue <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack thereof.

And so should corporations. That's what the McDonald's case was about.

well said Sue! You know, I almost jumped on the band wagon with Wayne
to spew forth the venom I have lingering in my bones towards [censored]
lawyers (especially my ex-wife's divorce lawyer) but upon further
reflection I realize our system of justice will make large
corporations realize how important it is to "be careful" and
constantly strive to eliminate dangerous situations involving their
customers.

If you do something wrong to someone else in our society...a jury of
your peers will decide how you will or will not be punished! (oh well,
that's not exactly true either is it! If one of the jurors has a beef
with "authority figures", the case will be hung without a conviction)
but I still think we have the best system of justice in the world even
if it ain't perfect!

Bill

Wayne Boatwright said:

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:34:06a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

Wayne Boatwright said:

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:07:29a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

> Wayne, McD's *asked* *for* *the* *lawsuit!* If they had settled
> for the $20,000 at the beginning, a very reasonable sum which
> didn't come close to the medical costs, there would have been no
> lawsuit! The compensatory damages in her case were reduced to
> $160,000 because the jury found her 20% responsible for the
> injuries. That means that McDonald's was 80% responsible. In
> addition to the jury's assessment of McDonald's role, "the judge
> called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous and willful."

Quoted message said:

All very true, Sue, but it raises my ire.

People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack
thereof.

And so should corporations. That's what the McDonald's case was
about.

I've never agreed that McDonald's was in any way at fault. Coffee is
supposed to be hot. Adults ordering coffee should have the
expectation that it will be hot and know how to handle it. The
plaintiff's actions were "reckless", given that she knew she had a
cup of hot coffee.

When I purchase a carryout beverage, hot or cold, the first thing I
do is check that the lid is secure, if for no other reason that not
having it spill all over my car.

I'm in agreement with you, Wayne. I don't think McD's should have been held
responsible. The woman probably would have [censored] and sued if she'd
ordered hot coffee and it was lukewarm or cold. You just can't satisfy some
people.

I got burned making tea with the Bunn coffee maker at the office that had a
hot water-tap. Did I sue my employer? No. Did I sue Bunn? No. It
splashed. I probably said some expletives, but then I rinsed my hand under
cool water and went back to my desk with my tea.

Meanwhile, do not iron your clothes while you're wearing them. And don't
use your blow-dryer in the shower 😉 Oh, and that plastic bag your
dry-cleaning comes in? It is NOT a toy!

Jill

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 07:44:18a, jmcquown wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

Wayne Boatwright said:

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:34:06a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:07:29a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>> Wayne, McD's *asked* *for* *the* *lawsuit!* If they had settled
>> for the $20,000 at the beginning, a very reasonable sum which
>> didn't come close to the medical costs, there would have been no
>> lawsuit! The compensatory damages in her case were reduced to
>> $160,000 because the jury found her 20% responsible for the
>> injuries. That means that McDonald's was 80% responsible. In
>> addition to the jury's assessment of McDonald's role, "the judge
>> called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous and willful."

>
> All very true, Sue, but it raises my ire.
>
> People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack
> thereof.

And so should corporations. That's what the McDonald's case was
about.

I've never agreed that McDonald's was in any way at fault. Coffee is
supposed to be hot. Adults ordering coffee should have the
expectation that it will be hot and know how to handle it. The
plaintiff's actions were "reckless", given that she knew she had a
cup of hot coffee.

When I purchase a carryout beverage, hot or cold, the first thing I
do is check that the lid is secure, if for no other reason that not
having it spill all over my car.

I'm in agreement with you, Wayne. I don't think McD's should have been
held responsible. The woman probably would have [censored] and sued if
she'd ordered hot coffee and it was lukewarm or cold. You just can't
satisfy some people.

I got burned making tea with the Bunn coffee maker at the office that
had a hot water-tap. Did I sue my employer? No. Did I sue Bunn? No.
It splashed. I probably said some expletives, but then I rinsed my hand
under cool water and went back to my desk with my tea.

Meanwhile, do not iron your clothes while you're wearing them. And
don't use your blow-dryer in the shower 😉 Oh, and that plastic bag
your dry-cleaning comes in? It is NOT a toy!

Aw, shucks, Jill. It's just so much easier ironing my clothes while I'm
wearing them! :-)

--
Wayne Boatwright *¿*
____________________________________________

My doctor told me to stop having intimate dinners for four,
unless there are three other people.

---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0533-5, 08/20/2005
Tested on: 8/21/2005 8:03:42 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

Jill wrote (I *trimmed* like a good netizen should):

Quoted message said:

Oh, and that plastic bag your dry-cleaning comes in? It is NOT a toy!

Have you heard about "the choking game"?

Bob

Bill said:

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 09:34:06 -0400, Curly Sue <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack thereof.

And so should corporations. That's what the McDonald's case was about.

Nah. It was about Stella blaming someone else for her negligence.

Quoted message said:

well said Sue! You know, I almost jumped on the band wagon with Wayne
to spew forth the venom I have lingering in my bones towards [censored]
lawyers (especially my ex-wife's divorce lawyer) but upon further
reflection I realize our system of justice will make large
corporations realize how important it is to "be careful" and
constantly strive to eliminate dangerous situations involving their
customers.

Right. In principle. And a good principle it is. But there are howevers...

In the specific case, though, McD's had the lousiest lawyers in the
universe who didn't do their homework and let a lot of bad information
be entered into the record. McD's did nothing different than every other
restaurant, convenience store and ammo shop that sells take-out coffee.
An old lady spilled hot coffee on herself as though she didn't know that
coffee is hot.

Quoted message said:

If you do something wrong to someone else in our society...a jury of
your peers will decide how you will or will not be punished! (oh well,
that's not exactly true either is it!

Right.

Pastorio

Wayne Boatwright said:

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:34:06a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack
thereof.

And so should corporations. That's what the McDonald's case was about.

I've never agreed that McDonald's was in any way at fault. Coffee is
supposed to be hot. Adults ordering coffee should have the expectation
that it will be hot and know how to handle it. The plaintiff's actions
were "reckless", given that she knew she had a cup of hot coffee.

When I purchase a carryout beverage, hot or cold, the first thing I do is
check that the lid is secure, if for no other reason that not having it
spill all over my car.

What you are doing, then, is checking the corporation's safety
procedures and absolving them of their responsibility to provide a
secure container, which is the default assumption when they hand you a
cup with a lid on it. Do you check your burger for pathogens too?

Curly Sue said:

Wayne Boatwright said:

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:34:06a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

Quoted message said:

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack
> thereof.

And so should corporations. That's what the McDonald's case was about.

I've never agreed that McDonald's was in any way at fault. Coffee is
supposed to be hot. Adults ordering coffee should have the
expectation that it will be hot and know how to handle it. The
plaintiff's actions were "reckless", given that she knew she had a cup
of hot coffee.

When I purchase a carryout beverage, hot or cold, the first thing I do
is check that the lid is secure, if for no other reason that not
having it spill all over my car.

What you are doing, then, is checking the corporation's safety
procedures and absolving them of their responsibility to provide a
secure container, which is the default assumption when they hand you a
cup with a lid on it. Do you check your burger for pathogens too?

How stupid a parallel to try to strike.

You don't just mean "secure." You mean "absolutely, perfectly secure."
No such thing.

But, beyond that, Stella took the lid off to add fixings. It didn't come
off by itself. She spilled it on herself. Do learn about it before
saying dumb stuff and try to keep your knee from jerking like that.

Pastorio

Bob (this one) said:

Curly Sue said:

Wayne Boatwright said:

On Sun 21 Aug 2005 06:34:06a, Curly Sue wrote in rec.food.cooking:

>
> Wayne Boatwright wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

>> People need to take responsibility for their own actions or lack
>> thereof.
>
>
> And so should corporations. That's what the McDonald's case was about.

I've never agreed that McDonald's was in any way at fault. Coffee is
supposed to be hot. Adults ordering coffee should have the
expectation that it will be hot and know how to handle it. The
plaintiff's actions were "reckless", given that she knew she had a
cup of hot coffee.

When I purchase a carryout beverage, hot or cold, the first thing I
do is check that the lid is secure, if for no other reason that not
having it spill all over my car.

What you are doing, then, is checking the corporation's safety
procedures and absolving them of their responsibility to provide a
secure container, which is the default assumption when they hand you a
cup with a lid on it. Do you check your burger for pathogens too?

How stupid a parallel to try to strike.

You don't just mean "secure." You mean "absolutely, perfectly secure."
No such thing.

But, beyond that, Stella took the lid off to add fixings. It didn't come
off by itself. She spilled it on herself. Do learn about it before
saying dumb stuff and try to keep your knee from jerking like that.

Pastorio

Poor Bob. Still smarting from the "agita" fiasco...

jmcquown said:

I'm guessing (just guessing, mind you) she knew the old splash on the wrist
trick if she ever fed the infant warmed formula from a bottle? Hell, I'm
not a mother and even *I* know that. And while we're at it, shouldn't a 1
year old still be fed by mommy with a spoon?

At 1 (or even before), you let them begin feeding themselves. I
wouldn't do it in a restaurant - WAAAAAAY too messy! But this is
probably the kind of Mother - and I use the term lightly - who doesn't
think once about who has to clean up the mess her kids leave behind.

Quoted message said:

I wonder how much she was
seeking in actual damages and additional "pain and suffering" due to the
distress of a red spot requiring (OMG!) burn ointment?

Who knows. I think $8500.00 was generous. I feel sorry for the kid.
It's the Mother's fault, 100%.

-L.

Curly Sue said:

Wayne Boatwright said:

One who is either too stupid to even be a mother -or- one who thought
a minor burn would be a ticket to a small fortune. Opportunistic,
sue-happy [censored]!

Wayne! Such language!!!

Quoted message said:

I hope the court either denies the settlment and throws it out, or
awards her a penny!

Like the old woman, Stella Liebeck, who was awarded half a million for
dumping hot coffee in her lap. I'd like to have poured it over her head!

Quoted message said:

Society should not have to be protected from itself to this extent,
nor should frivolous lawsuits be accepted in a court of law.

Zeesh!

Society? It's a giant corporation and the amount of money involved was a
PITTANCE to them. The only effect the suit had on society was
entertainment 🙂

Wayne, McD's *asked* *for* *the* *lawsuit!* If they had settled for the
$20,000 at the beginning, a very reasonable sum which didn't come close
to the medical costs, there would have been no lawsuit! The
compensatory damages in her case were reduced to $160,000 because the
jury found her 20% responsible for the injuries. That means that
McDonald's was 80% responsible. In addition to the jury's assessment of
McDonald's role, "the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous
and willful."

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

If there's one thing to be learned from the coffee case, which should be
applied to the mashed potatoes case, is that the media loves to play up
this stuff. Remember, there are two sides to every story. The media
reports, especially at the beginning, don't always provide the whole
story, but it does increase their circulation!

That lectlaw page is full of [censored], IMHO. We've discussed it many
times here. Perhaps McD's should have settled out of court, and the
woman's injuries were awful, but the lawsuit had no merit at all.

If a restaurant serves me coffee at 135 degrees, I'm sending it back,
and I don't even drink my coffee all that hot.

Best regards,
Bob

"Wayne Boatwright" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

When I purchase a carryout beverage, hot or cold, the first thing I do is
check that the lid is secure, if for no other reason that not having it
spill all over my car.

That's the thing, I don't put any beverage served in one
of those squeezable containers between my legs, lid on
or not. Sheesh, I had to scald myself untold times before
I decided, put the coffee down before trying to put the
lid on. Guess I like pain.

Quoted message said:

My doctor told me to stop having intimate dinners for four,
unless there are three other people.

Your sig just cracks me up.

nancy

_.-In rec.food.cooking, -L. wrote the following -._

Quoted message said:

http://home.hamptonroads.com/s tories/story.cfm?story=90839&r an=40944

"CHESAPEAKE - An $8,500 settlement has been tentatively reached
between Chili's Grill and Bar and a local mother who alleged her
1-year-old son was injured at the restaurant after being served hot
mashed potatoes.

If I should happen to meet this woman (I am local to Chesapeake) I
would want to ask her if her child will be all right. If he was
hidously scared for life. If he will be wearing a mask to school to
prevent other kids from running in terror.

I would love to know what 'overheated' means. What is the offical
point at which a food product is overheated? Shouldn't she sue the
manufacturer of the stove since it didn't have enough safty features
to prevent the food from overheating?

--
.-'😉) fauxascii.com ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson