[Bobboau]

Call me retarded

ok.

...

...

She has consumed the product in the past implies that she is familiar with it, and familiar with the temperature at which it is served. She has probably sipped it right after getting it and gotten one of those loose-skin-on-the-roof-of-your-mouth burns. or are you arguing that McDonald's served it hot just this one time?

I tell you what, just so we don't waist time, hypothetically if it was universally and completely known by all humans that McDonald's coffee was effectively molten lava that needed an hour to cool off before it wouldn't just burn it's way through you and the floor beneath you whould that change your position? is her knowledge critical to your position?

[Aesaar]

Call me retarded

ok.

...

...

She has consumed the product in the past implies that she is familiar with it, and familiar with the temperature at which it is served. She has probably sipped it right after getting it and gotten one of those loose-skin-on-the-roof-of-your-mouth burns. or are you arguing that McDonald's served it hot just this one time?

I tell you what, just so we don't waist time, hypothetically if it was universally and completely known by all humans that McDonald's coffee was effectively molten lava that needed an hour to cool off before it wouldn't just burn it's way through you and the floor beneath you whould that change your position? is her knowledge critical to your position?

Whether she knew it was that hot or not doesn't matter.  It could have happened to someone who'd never gone to McDonald's for coffee.  It's perfectly reasonable to expect that your coffee won't be hot enough to cause third degree burns because causing third degree burns isn't the purpose of coffee on any level.  It's not even on the list of things you should worry about.  Making a mess if it's spilled?  Obviously  Burning your mouth a bit?  Sure.  Melting your flesh off?  No.  Coffee shouldn't be served that hot unless you specifically ask for it to be served that hot.  It sure as hell shouldn't be the default temperature.

Comparing is to gasoline makes no sense.  Gasoline being flammable is something it's reasonable to expect everyone to know.  That your coffee can cause third degree burns is not.

[Bobboau]

Coffee is made by boiling water through ground coffee beans, it being hot enough to cause third degree burns IS something I am aware of and take precautions about and expect.

Or would be if a drank coffee, I drink tea which has similar properties.

[Bobboau]

BTW, thanks to whoever split this thread.
[edit]The E, thank you[/edit]

[zookeeper]

Coffee isn't supposed to be hot enough to cause third degree burns? As far as a little bit of googling can tell me, water doesn't need to be anywhere near the temperature in this case (180–190 °F / 82–88 °C) for that to happen.

That's not to say the coffee wasn't unreasonably hot in this case, just that the threshold can't really be called "able to cause third degree burns" because that's describing most coffee.

[karajorma]

Coffee has a correct range of serving temperatures and it's not unreasonable to expect coffee to be served somewhere in that range. It should not be served at the boiling point of water! The correct range is 60 to 80 degrees depending on the quality of the coffee and whether you want it piping hot or not. The coffee in the McDonald's case was served at around 90 degrees a full 10 degrees hotter than that. So all that needed to be proved in the court case is that the extra temperature represented an unreasonable danger for the customers.

Coffee isn't supposed to be hot enough to cause third degree burns? As far as a little bit of googling can tell me, water doesn't need to be anywhere near the temperature in this case (180–190 °F / 82–88 °C) for that to happen.

There is a difference in the time taken to cause those burns though. The difference could have given the woman an extra 10-15 seconds to prevent the burns becoming as severe.

[Bobboau]

It soaked into her pants and car seat while she was strapped into a car, that held her in contact with it and is the reason why she got so burned and most people who spilled their coffee on themselves back then didn't.

[DarkBasilisk]

To put more concisely, she won because there's an expected temperature for coffee, they served it significantly higher than that without notice, making it difficult to properly assess the risk of the situation.

Common sense only applies when something is common knowledge. Making their product not conform to common expectations in a way that would be non-obvious, with no warning about the difference, is dangerous, and where they got in trouble. If it were standard temperature coffee, or just an anomaly that heated it more, they'd likely have won instead.

[swashmebuckle]

I feel like there's also an expected degree of induced self loathing and diarrhea from eating fast food that McDonalds routinely exceeds as well, does anyone else think we should be able to sue them for that?