You can be rich if you win the lawsuit

[Jeneral2885]

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Cal-graduate-sues-In-N-Out-over-spilled-coffee-5500194.php

[Scuba]

1. Typical right-wing "we need tort reform" example of a perhaps frivolous lawsuit.

If there was not harm, no wrong doing, then the plaintiff will get no compensation.

Interesting how the free-market libertarian types argue that the courts are the avenue for redress of wrongs, but then want tort reform so that harmed parties can't sue for damages. Somewhat hypocritical, don't you think?

[COLGATE4]

2. Agreed. This is doubly false in that it seems to trivialize

the injuries to this Plaintiff much like what was done in the earlier McDonalds lawsuit. To illustrate why this isn't a potential windfall let's look at what actually happened in the earlier McDonalds suit: McDonalds had a corporate policy of keeping their coffee ten degrees hotter than anyone else in the industry. At that temperature an additional ten degrees results in third degree burns rather than second degree burns. McDonalds had had this same problem before. Finally, bowing to their lawyers (who were aware of the potential liability) they decided to do nothing but put a warning about being the coffee being hot in tiny letters on the plastic lid.

The reason they kept the coffee so hot as to be dangerous? To keep customers from seeking free refills (wait for it to cool down so not enough time for a second cup)

The Plaintiff in the McDonalds case at first only asked them for her medical expenses - some $40,000. McDonalds, in a clear demonstration of corporate compassion, refused. So she sued. And even then the jury verdict was later substantially reduced by a judge.

Her trivial injuries? Third degree burns to her inner thighs and genitals. Multiple surgeries and skin grafts, not to mention a whole lot of hospitalization and pain.

[GeorgeGist]

4. How cheap is McDonalds?

So cheap they guard their ketchup packs like caviar.

[COLGATE4]

5. Their entire business model is based on

a penny-pinching almost unfathomable to normal everyday persons.

[pnwmom]

3. And In-N-Out SHOULD lose the lawsuit if they refused to call the ambulance

and gave her ice even though she was severely burned.

From the OP article:

The coffee spilled onto Chen's thighs and lap. The pain caused her to scream "call 911, call 911," Boyd said.

The worker refused, citing company policy. Employees finally handed her a bag of ice and told her to move her car out of the way despite her continued screams for help, Boyd said,

"Ice is a bad thing to give for burns. It exacerbates the wound and the scarring," Boyd said. Meanwhile, "she's got second-degree burns and all they are worried about is her moving her car so they could get to the next person in line."

Chen, whose friend eventually called 911, was treated for three days at the Bothin Burn Center at Saint Francis Memorial Hospital in San Francisco.

[COLGATE4]

6. I'm not sure that she has any cause of action

for their failure to call an ambulance. Her case will rest on her proving negligence for serving the coffee 1) in an inappropriate container 2) without a paper handle 3) at an inappropriately hot temperature likely to cause severe damage if spilled.

[pnwmom]

7. It will certainly figure into the jury's feelings, if there's a jury trial.

No matter what the letter of the law says.

But the insurer will probably settle before it comes to that.

[COLGATE4]

8. Inadmissible at trial. But I agree that

it will certainly settle. These good folks learned the lesson from McDonalds.