decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
How is this different? | 312 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
How is this different?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 28 2012 @ 02:39 AM EDT
Coffee case: similar case have been thrown out of UK court as baseless. Speaking
about that, seven similar cases have been thrown out of US courts until this one
passed.

Unfortunately, jury decided as it decided and pushed legal standards down.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

How is this different?
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 28 2012 @ 08:42 AM EDT
When that woman sued McDonald's for getting scolded on he thighs because she held the coffee cup between them and the lid popped off (and won); it was totally McDonald's fault for making the coffee too hot. The real fault McDonald's had was NOT to put a warning on the cup "Do NOT hold this cup between your thighs as the lid may pop off" as then it was clear that she should not have done the act and it was all her own fault.
If you dig into the details of the case, it wasn't all her own fault and this isn't as dumb of a judgement as it might at first seem.

Sure, driving with it between her thighs was a dumb thing to do. But McDonald's was also at fault due to making the coffee with very hot water -- well above what was normally done -- as a cost savings. With hotter water, they could get more coffee out of the same quantity of beans. And it was demonstrated in the court that they knew it was a safety issue using the hotter water.

While a normal cup of coffee would have been painful to the lap, theirs caused injury.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )