I don't buy it actually. I'm pretty sure if you show a pattern of neglect you can sue for something.
I don't buy it actually. I'm pretty sure if you show a pattern of neglect you can sue for something.
King was a ward of the court and living at the Casa Pacifica shelter for abused, neglected and emotionally troubled children at the time of the shooting.
Had she been burned when a McD's employee dumped coffee on her, sue away! Had she been burned because the lid was not on correctly, sue away! Neither of these is the case.Its really easy to see these suits as frivolous.
The Mcdonalds coffe burn lady suit was scoffed at and if you look at the real facts behind it she was burned horriblely.
Yeah, I'm sure you're right. I'm just trying to think of a reason why their lawyer would have them go this route instead of focusing on the neglect, because it's kind of insane.
Maybe this has something to do with it:
Had she been burned when a McD's employee dumped coffee on her, sue away! Had she been burned because the lid was not on correctly, sue away! Neither of these is the case.
She was burned when she took the cover off the cup WHILE HER SON WAS DRIVING! Sorry her Ya-ya got burned, but it's not McD's fault and it's a bad analogy.
..........
From what I have read, the kid didn't violate the dress code. He wore the uniform, he just added things to it.
But the person that killed this kid is the one who pulled the trigger.
Had she been burned when a McD's employee dumped coffee on her, sue away! Had she been burned because the lid was not on correctly, sue away! Neither of these is the case.
She was burned when she took the cover off the cup WHILE HER SON WAS DRIVING! Sorry her Ya-ya got burned, but it's not McD's fault and it's a bad analogy.
True, I'm suprised his parents didn't sue the parents straight away. I think I would have flipped out on the entire family in the worse possible way.
????
True, I'm suprised his parents didn't sue the parents straight away. I think I would have flipped out on the entire family in the worse possible way.
Who spilled the coffee from a properly sealed cup?The product was not drinkable at a scolding temperature.
When you sell an ediable product that causes major harm to humans you should be sued.
She spilled the coffee. It's that simple.No, you need to (as was suggested) get the FACTS on a case.
The coffee at this particular McDonalds was hotter than is suggested. The manager had the temperature turned UP on the coffee pot to cut down on refills. If the coffee is hotter they don't drink as much.
So his negligence lead to her injuries. If the coffee had been the temperature that McDonalds AND the coffee maker recommend there would have been no serious damage.