Is American law insane?

[Blind groper]

This is a query for our American posters. Is your legal system totally off its nut?

Recently I was told of a case in which a woman bought a cup of coffee from MacDonalds, and spilled it on herself, causing burns to her legs. She sued MacDonalds and got compensation of nearly $ 3 million. She claimed the coffee was too hot and that Macdonalds failed to warn her.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v. ... estaurants

Come on guys!
The coffee was too hot? Is she a moron or something? When someone serves me a cup of coffee, I treat it with caution, and allow it to cool down if needed. And the accident was one of her own making. She did the spilling. How the hell was MacDonalds at fault?

$ 3,000,000???
Shit. I would willingly dip my genitals in a hot cup of coffee to get that much money.

Is this normal? Are American judges totally living in fairyland? Is the American legal system insane?

[Kristie]

True story. Ages ago though. And, yes, it's fucked up.

[SteveB]

What's more insane is that they're using that particular case to reform tort, so it'll be harder for people to do a class action suit against a company that's harmed them.

There's a documentary about it called Hot Coffee, I think.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

She never got $3,000,000, btw. Judicial review cut it down to less than a tenth of that.

[cowiz]

Yes. Witnessed it first hand myself this week.

[Warren Dew]

She never got $3,000,000, btw. Judicial review cut it down to less than a tenth of that.

According to wikipedia, $640,000.

[JimC]

She never got $3,000,000, btw. Judicial review cut it down to less than a tenth of that.

According to wikipedia, $640,000.

Even that is a fuck of a lot of compensation for a coffee burn...

Oh well, gotta keep those lawyers in BMWs...

[cogwheel]

She never got $3,000,000, btw. Judicial review cut it down to less than a tenth of that.

According to wikipedia, $640,000.

Even that is a fuck of a lot of compensation for a coffee burn...

Which is why you should watch Hot Coffee... Or at least look for pictures of the burns she suffered.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

She never got $3,000,000, btw. Judicial review cut it down to less than a tenth of that.

According to wikipedia, $640,000.

Okay, 21.33333333333333%

[surreptitious57]

Apparently in Florida it is a criminal offence to perform oral sex on your husband in a motel on your honeymoon.

[Warren Dew]

She never got $3,000,000, btw. Judicial review cut it down to less than a tenth of that.

According to wikipedia, $640,000.

Even that is a fuck of a lot of compensation for a coffee burn...

Which is why you should watch Hot Coffee... Or at least look for pictures of the burns she suffered.

As a result of holding her coffee between her knees instead of having a free cupholder in the car, yes.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

She proved she didn't know hot things are hot. That's pretty awesome.

[Graculus]

She never got $3,000,000, btw. Judicial review cut it down to less than a tenth of that.

According to wikipedia, $640,000.

Even that is a fuck of a lot of compensation for a coffee burn...

Oh well, gotta keep those lawyers in BMWs...

It's not compensation for the burn. That store had been cited numerous times for the coffee being too hot. You know the old joke about hitting the dog & the 2x4?

"First, you have to get his attention"

[surreptitious57]

I do have some sympathy for here, given her age and the severity of the burns she suffered and the level of medical attention required. This wasn't just someoene who spilled a bit of liquid on themselves. At that age one is more susceptible to pain so those burns would have been more intense. You could argue it was her own fault but this is an old lady we are talking about here. The compensation she demanded was in part to pay for her medical bills. Being retired, her income would probably be restricted to a pension. If I was McDonalds, I would have promptly settled out of court and generously too. It would have been the right and proper thing to do.

[Blind groper]

it is worth noting, though, that similar lawsuits in Britain were thrown out of court. The British court pointed out that customers demand hot coffee, and reducing the temperature to that which would not scald would make the coffee too cold to be attractive. MacDonalds, in effect, are forced to serve coffee hot to satisfy customer demand. So it seems kinda ridiculous to blame MacDonalds for the fact that their coffee was the correct temperature to suit its customers, when the accident was caused by the woman herself.

The coffee cup actually carried a written warning about hot coffee, but the court ruled that the writing was too small.

This appears to me to be a very strong symptom of a system way out of whack.