Morons in the News

huskers1217

huskers1217

Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Posts
26,613
Reaction score
29,620
Bookie:
$ 500.00
Location
Sitting in Houston Traffic....
DJ said:
View attachment 20261
Click to expand...
She's already announced she going to sue Gorilla Glue. Apparently, she got confused because the product she'd wanted to use, yet couldn't and consciously made the choice to go to Gorilla Glue, had a similar name?

Just cut the damn hair off, feel stupid for awhile and then move on with your life. I didn't think it was possible, but this might actually be a dumber basis for a lawsuit than the my-McDonald's-coffee-is-too-hot one.
 
DJ said:
View attachment 20261
Click to expand...

Moving forward, you know an edited version of that is going to be used on their packaging.

Whenever I run across some sort of "this is not a toy," or "not fit for human consumption" label, I always think, "ok, what fucking idiot thought it was a toy or fit for human consumption."

Derpity, derp ... oh, look at this silica packet in my bottle of vitamins. It looks tasty, I think I'll eat it.
 
Mofo said:
She's already announced she going to sue Gorilla Glue. Apparently, she got confused because the product she'd wanted to use, yet couldn't and consciously made the choice to go to Gorilla Glue, had a similar name?

Just cut the damn hair off, feel stupid for awhile and then move on with your life. I didn't think it was possible, but this might actually be a dumber basis for a lawsuit than the my-McDonald's-coffee-is-too-hot one.
Click to expand...
That old ass lady got over 600k....
 
20210210_183039.jpg
 
Mofo said:
She's already announced she going to sue Gorilla Glue. Apparently, she got confused because the product she'd wanted to use, yet couldn't and consciously made the choice to go to Gorilla Glue, had a similar name?

Just cut the damn hair off, feel stupid for awhile and then move on with your life. I didn't think it was possible, but this might actually be a dumber basis for a lawsuit than the my-McDonald's-coffee-is-too-hot one.
Click to expand...
The McDonalds lawsuit was legit. The lady got third degree burns and tried to reach a 20k settlement that McDonalds refused to pay and that came after years of McDonalds being told they store their coffee way too hot. They were negligent, the lady tried to be reasonable, they refused, they got sued and rightfully lost.
 
wNY6aM.gif
 
Illustrious Potentate said:
The McDonalds lawsuit was legit. The lady got third degree burns and tried to reach a 20k settlement that McDonalds refused to pay and that came after years of McDonalds being told they store their coffee way too hot. They were negligent, the lady tried to be reasonable, they refused, they got sued and rightfully lost.
Click to expand...
She was carrying the coffee in her lap, in her car, trying to put in her cream and sugar. The spillage was entirely her fault and/or the fault of whoever was driving the car. McDonald's did, in fact, offered to pay some of her medical expenses, but the woman wanted full compensation for injuries she caused herself. When the case was finally litigated, the jury even said that the woman was partially at fault. McDonald's, in the end, was held accountable, because the "hot" coffee they advertised and sold, was indeed hot, and much of the witness testimony revolved around how quickly a beverage that people wanted to buy as hot, would scald the skin, should any given idiot splash it all over themselves in a fit of stupidity. Later, after McDonald's adjusted the temperature of the coffee downwards accordingly, many people complained (and even sued), saying the coffee was too cold.
 
Mofo said:
She was carrying the coffee in her lap, in her car, trying to put in her cream and sugar. The spillage was entirely her fault and/or the fault of whoever was driving the car. McDonald's did, in fact, offered to pay some of her medical expenses, but the woman wanted full compensation for injuries she caused herself. When the case was finally litigated, the jury even said that the woman was partially at fault. McDonald's, in the end, was held accountable, because the "hot" coffee they advertised and sold, was indeed hot, and much of the witness testimony revolved around how quickly a beverage that people wanted to buy as hot, would scald the skin, should any given idiot splash it all over themselves in a fit of stupidity. Later, after McDonald's adjusted the temperature of the coffee downwards accordingly, many people complained (and even sued), saying the coffee was too cold.
Click to expand...
www.vox.com

What a lot of people get wrong about the infamous 1994 McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit

Adam Ruins Everything explains that the case wasn’t about greed, but about a working-class woman forcing a big company to make its product safer.
www.vox.com www.vox.com

McDonalds offered a whole $800.
 
Mofo said:
She was carrying the coffee in her lap, in her car, trying to put in her cream and sugar. The spillage was entirely her fault and/or the fault of whoever was driving the car. McDonald's did, in fact, offered to pay some of her medical expenses, but the woman wanted full compensation for injuries she caused herself. When the case was finally litigated, the jury even said that the woman was partially at fault. McDonald's, in the end, was held accountable, because the "hot" coffee they advertised and sold, was indeed hot, and much of the witness testimony revolved around how quickly a beverage that people wanted to buy as hot, would scald the skin, should any given idiot splash it all over themselves in a fit of stupidity. Later, after McDonald's adjusted the temperature of the coffee downwards accordingly, many people complained (and even sued), saying the coffee was too cold.
Click to expand...
The car wasn’t moving. They offered 800 dollars. The coffee in question was stored significantly hotter than it was supposed to be and McDonalds had been warned about it numerous times. They deserved to lose
 
RoyMunson said:
www.vox.com

What a lot of people get wrong about the infamous 1994 McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit

Adam Ruins Everything explains that the case wasn’t about greed, but about a working-class woman forcing a big company to make its product safer.
www.vox.com www.vox.com

McDonalds offered a whole $800.
Click to expand...
And? The mistake was of her making. It’s the equivalent of you getting burned while cooking vegetables and suing Mazola or you tripping on the sidewalk over untied laces and suing Nike. She went after the big, huge corporation because they had the money, her law firm was working on contingency, and yes- her medical costs were substantial.
Illustrious Potentate said:
The car wasn’t moving. They offered 800 dollars. The coffee in question was stored significantly hotter than it was supposed to be and McDonalds had been warned about it numerous times. They deserved to lose
Click to expand...
Did I say the car was moving? It clearly wasn’t an optimum way of handling any liquid to prevent a spill, or even a passable one. There were no regulations on safe storage temperatures. The judgment was reduced several times since the idiot woman “won” and assessed as too punitive, given the plaintiff’s culpability.
 
Mofo said:
And? The mistake was of her making. It’s the equivalent of you getting burned while cooking vegetables and suing Mazola or you tripping on the sidewalk over untied laces and suing Nike. She went after the big, huge corporation because they had the money, her law firm was working on contingency, and yes- her medical costs were substantial.

Did I say the car was moving? It clearly wasn’t an optimum way of handling any liquid to prevent a spill, or even a passable one. There were no regulations on safe storage temperatures. The judgment was reduced several times since the idiot woman “won” and assessed as too punitive, given the plaintiff’s culpability.
Click to expand...

derp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top