this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
1434 points (98.5% liked)

Today I Learned

17900 readers
7 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

During the trial it was revealed that McDonald’s knew that heating their coffee to this temperature would be dangerous, but they did it anyways because it would save them money. When you serve coffee that is too hot to drink, it will take much longer for a person to drink their coffee, which means that McDonald’s will not have to give out as many free refills of coffee. This policy by the fast food chain is the reason the jury awarded $2.7 million dollars in punitive damages in the McDonald's hot coffee case. Punitive damages are meant to punish the defendant for their inappropriate business practice.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 289 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

It's pretty screwed up how the media made light of this lawsuit.

A lawsuit that ended in gross negligence, and the media shamed the lady involved for a decade.

[–] JoeClu 66 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's pretty scary how media can influence us so much, even when we think they aren't, and even when we think "only dumb people fall for it." No my friend, the majority fall for it. Not cause they're dumb, but because they've scienced the hell out of human nature and know precisely how to do it right under our noses. It started with marketing and advertising that works well, unfortunately. They've cracked the psyche code. Media adopted it. Big tech improved it. Gah... this is turning into a rant about capitalism; I didn't intend to go there. Eek.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FlyingSquid 27 points 1 year ago

I'm just glad for her that almost no one knows her name. Can you imagine the doxxing and death threats she would be getting if this happened today?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 196 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The woman's scalds were almost enough to kill her. She spent weeks in hospital and needed skin grafts. To make it worse, McDonald's had received multiple complaints about the temperature of their coffee.

[–] MeatsOfRage 119 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Her lawsuit was just to help cover the medical expenses. McDonald's didn't want a precedence of being sued so their PR cooked up a narrative of greedy frivolous lawsuits and America bought this story hook line and sinker.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] brygphilomena 71 points 1 year ago (18 children)

It fused her labia together. The coffee was so hot and the burns were so bad that her labia fused together.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] slumlordthanatos 28 points 1 year ago

They had a slush fund set up specifically to pay out settlements for coffee burns.

They knew it was a problem, but decided it would be cheaper to pay off burn victims than to serve their coffee at a safe temperature.

[–] ohlaph 150 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When you dive into that case, you definitely side with the lady. She had some pretty serious burns, like way beyond what most of us would get if we spilled coffee that we made at the house.

If my memory serves me well, she originally only asked them to cover the medical expenses. So their greed ended up costing them far more.

[–] [email protected] 59 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The injuries involved the phrase "labia fused to leg".

[–] SacrificedBeans 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Oh.. I can't unread that...

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 140 points 1 year ago (7 children)

It was used as the definitive "Frivolous Lawsuit", but... in reality McDonalds just told Media Companies "Make us look like the victim here, or we're pulling our precious advertising dollars."

[–] OrteilGenou 73 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The picture of that poor woman's thighs is all you need to see to know this was not a frivolous suit

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I just wish the victims lawyers had responded to those claims with the pictures of that poor woman's third degree burns. she suffered horrifically and for years.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 128 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Must be one of the more successful smear campaigns in recent history. I'm not even from the us and we heard about that shit and used it as an example of greed and frivolous lawsuits. It was only like 5 years back I learned the truth. Believed that shit for 25 years..

Edit: oops should've responded to the media part of thread

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Poor lady. Her labia was physically fused together from the heat, but she was still called dramatic. I can't imagine everything that she had to go through.

[–] maniajack 27 points 1 year ago (12 children)

And she originally only asked for McDonald's to cover her medical expenses ($20k) which they refused.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] jenniebuckley 105 points 1 year ago (39 children)

but yet people will still dismiss it as a stupid lawsuit by some greedy woman. gotta protect those big corps

[–] [email protected] 62 points 1 year ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (38 replies)
[–] bemenaker 82 points 1 year ago (6 children)

They had also been warned several times previously to stop doing it.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 74 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh man there is so much to this case. First, she asked for like $40k, enough to cover the cost of the medical bills. To be clear, she received extensive burns as the coffee was so hot that it would burn in seconds (the wiki had a breakdown of the times/temps and they were illuminating). Moreover, it wasn’t even the hottest coffee available. Starbucks was serving much hotter coffee at the time (the hottest I think recorded). In the end, she got paid, but McDs never cooled their coffee (nor did anyone else), all they did was make better lids lol.

[–] maniajack 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

AND she was in a car with no cup holders. It wasn't a standard feature in sports cars in the 90s. She had borrowed it from her son.

https://www.capitalone.com/cars/learn/managing-your-money-wisely/remembering-the-ford-probes-role-in-the-infamous-mcdonalds-hot-coffee-lawsuit/1299

And you're right that it didn't change coffee temps that much:

“During the Liebeck court proceedings, McDonald’s said it served its coffee between 180 and 190 degrees,” according to The New York Times. “The company has refused to disclose today’s standard temperature, but Retro Report shows a handbook for franchisees calling for temperatures 10 degrees lower.”

If it doesn’t sound like much, it’s because it’s not. McDonald’s chooses to keep their coffee scaldingly hot because, according to attorney Butch Wagner, hot coffee stays fresh for longer. They save money by doing this (millions per day, in fact, across their US franchises alone), even if it means paying out for other hot coffee settlements—of which there are plenty.

https://thedieline.com/blog/2019/2/13/drink-at-your-own-risk-how-a-90s-lawsuit-changed-or-failed-to-change-coffee-drinking

[–] Cabrio 61 points 1 year ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I have to admit that i didn't expect that not boiling water could do so much damage.

[–] JustZ 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

She was wearing jeans. The superheated water absorbed into the fabric, and held it right against her skin. Part of the case was that McDonald's knew it was handing these cups of near-boiling water down, into vehicles, in which people were restrained. It made their conduct more negligent.

I had a soda spill on me once at a drivethrough. Everyone in the drive through business surely knows that things spill, down, onto customers.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 year ago (31 children)

People love narratives that are simple and have an easy to understand moral to them even if they're absolutely wrong. In this case, the narrative is that she asked for hot coffee and got hot coffee, and the moral is that people are greedy and stupid and you have to protect yourself from them. I've often found that one well-constructed point can blow these narratives up though. I was talking with my dad about this particular case, he's a big "gotta do something about these frivolous lawsuits" guy because he used to own a business that was adjacent to real estate and real estate is probably the most litigated business in America. I'm a big "frivolous lawsuits is a term exploitative industries use to get people excited to give up their rights" guy, so we were at loggerheads about this one. Eventually I was like "Have you ever spilled coffee? When you did, who paid for your skin grafts?" Turns out that when crafting their narrative about how she was "suing them for giving her what she asked for", the industry lobby left out the part where she had to spend 8 days in the hospital and have multiple reconstructive surgeries.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And she only asked McDonalds to cover her medical bills. It was the jury who threw out her request and instead punished McDonalds with the huge settlement, because they were horrified by how grossly negligent the company had been and decided her request wasn’t a strong enough punishment.

[–] AEsheron 20 points 1 year ago

Don't forget they had previously been ordered several times to reduce the temperature and refused.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago

the same goes for the Dingos Ate My Baby woman

dingos did eat her baby.

load more comments (29 replies)
[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Didn't realize the reason was this petty. I always thought it had something to do with how many beans it took, or the time or something like that. Not that it just took longer for a customer to drink Beca they'd be burning their mouth. I'm glad she got what was owed to her. Poor woman.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] drekly 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

EVERY coffee shop overheats the drinks in the UK and it's infuriating. Every chain coffee just tastes like scorched milk and burnt beans and you can't drink it for 30 mins.

I'm unsure whether, unlike this case, they serve it hot enough that if you spill it, your labia fuses together from the heat of the burns. Horrifying.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Tekchip 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can someone explain this to Dunkin Donuts and their molten coffee?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tdawg 21 points 1 year ago

Fun fact. The guy who served her the cup of coffee is related to the owner of a Panera franchise that I use to work for. Both him and his brother-in-law (I think that's how they were related) would talk about how that was their claim to fame back when they we're franchising with McDonalds

load more comments
view more: next ›