- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Jury Awards $800,000 to a Girl Burned by a Chicken McNugget....
Posted on 7/21/23 at 9:05 am to SECretariat
Posted on 7/21/23 at 9:05 am to SECretariat
quote:
Exactly. This is answer. Depends on the amount of negligence. If you put a chicken nugget covered still boiling oil into a box intended for kids, you will likely owe some damages.
I don't know how every Mexican joint hasn't been sued into bankruptcy due to those weapons of war they call fajitas. That shite can melt your face off, and is served with happy hour aquarium-sized margaritas to boot. Dangerous, dangerous!
1
Posted on 7/21/23 at 9:09 am to SlowFlowPro
IB Freeman loved loser pays
Posted on 7/21/23 at 9:15 am to LegendInMyMind
quote:
weapons of war they call fajitas
Posted on 7/21/23 at 9:15 am to StringedInstruments
quote:
Edit - I will say that everyone reacted similarly to the “spilled coffee” story from decades ago, and those pictures were gnarly looking. Not sure it was worth the big lawsuit, but I’d want some serious retribution if my skin was melted.
Big difference. The hot coffee case involved McD's setting the temperature on the heating element on the coffee maker to hold coffee at a temperature that was unsafe for human consumption. The coffee became a dangerous product.
In this case the nuggets are fried at a pre-set temperature that does not produce dangerous food. You can misuse the nuggets or fries by putting them on your leg, but they are no more dangerous than any other fried food product, which is to say, not dangerous.
This should be reversed on appeal.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 9:23 am to SteelerBravesDawg
The sad truth is that the parent ordered the chicken, accepted it from the Mcdonalds worker and made the decision to hand it to the child and claims no responsibility for their actions, which directly resulted in harm to the child.
Part of the "Must be someone else's fault" going crazy in our country.
Part of the "Must be someone else's fault" going crazy in our country.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 9:27 am to McMahonnequin
quote:
like McDonald's is going to hurt from that 800k loss
I'm sure there was someone on that jury with the same philosophy.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 9:55 am to McMahonnequin
quote:
If you read into the case a little, the plaintiff put on evidence that the nugget was over 200 degrees.
How did they do this? Was it based on the severity of the burns and the approximate time for how long it was pinned on her leg?
Regardless, I doubt they gave nuggets that were still registering at 200 degrees. They would have needed to damn near pull it straight from the basket and give it to the girl. Which then asks the next question, if they were 200 degrees, how bad was her mouth burned from the other nuggets (or did she try to eat it and it fell out from the heat)
Definitely will be an interesting case to see how McDonalds was found to be negligent or was it a simple case of human jury wanting to stick it to the faceless Billion-dollar organization and their insurance.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 9:58 am to MeridianDog
quote:
The sad truth is that the parent ordered the chicken, accepted it from the Mcdonalds worker and made the decision to hand it to the child and claims no responsibility for their actions, which directly resulted in harm to the child.
Especially a 4 year old that barely knows how to make sure their food is cool enough to eat. Then add to the fact that the girl is a non-verbal autistic (based on another poster statement); as a parent how does the mother not do more than just hand a box of food.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 9:59 am to Cosmo
quote:
frick lawyers. frick them
Well, the jury made the award. So frick the jury?
We're talking about a small child here. I'm willing to bet this was a kid's meal. So they are serving food to children that's so hot that it can cause 2nd degree burns. Not good.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:03 am to SteelerBravesDawg
And all the socialists want the workers to own the businness. Good luck.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:05 am to SteelerBravesDawg
Good thing she didn’t put the balm on.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:05 am to Jebadeb
quote:
Well, the jury made the award. So frick the jury? We're talking about a small child here. I'm willing to bet this was a kid's meal. So they are serving food to children that's so hot that it can cause 2nd degree burns. Not good.
So this four year old autistic girl went up to the counter and ordered her own food?
If the shite is that hot, any functioning human would know that. The parents fault.
We have got to start blaming the parents.
There are 13 year olds running around shooting people because of people like you don’t want any responsibility.
This post was edited on 7/21/23 at 10:07 am
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:05 am to SteelerBravesDawg
Headed to McDonalds now. Surely it’ll work for a white male too.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:08 am to Jebadeb
Plus, they were waiting at the window, blocking traffic behind them. What does McDonalds do other than pass them out the window as soon as they come out of the fryer?
"Sorry madam. You need to pull up so we can wait for the stuff you ordered to cool to room temperature, since you could sue us if it isn't."
"Sorry madam. You need to pull up so we can wait for the stuff you ordered to cool to room temperature, since you could sue us if it isn't."
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:09 am to Jebadeb
quote:
So they are serving food to children that's so hot that it can cause 2nd degree burns. Not good.
When they fry a batch of 50 nuggets, they don’t know which ones will be used for kids meals and which ones will be used for adult meals.
And McDonald’s did not serve it to a child, they handed it to an adult. Not sure if you’re a parent, but I would never hand my 4 year old a box of hot nuggets. This is negligence on the parent 100%.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:13 am to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
simple case of human jury wanting to stick it to the faceless Billion-dollar organization and their insurance.
Mother was negligent to me. She hands the box back to the kid without checking anything? I usually checked my kids food before I did that when he was younger for a variety of reasons. So kid doesn't get burned, but chokes on a nugget. McDonald's fault they made nuggets to large to swallow whole? bullshite verdict.
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:17 am to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
How did they do this? Was it based on the severity of the burns and the approximate time for how long it was pinned on her leg?
Basically yes from what I could understand. They had an expert who testified to a whole bunch of shite that I don't know anything about
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:19 am to dgnx6
quote:
If the shite is that hot, any functioning human would know that. The parents fault.
Any functioning human...like the workers at McDonald's
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:20 am to SteelerBravesDawg
2nd degree burn is pretty significant for hot food, it had to still have hot oil on it and wasn’t drained properly before serving
Not entirely unreasonable lawsuit considering it was a child, though the amount seems excessive for a small burn
Not entirely unreasonable lawsuit considering it was a child, though the amount seems excessive for a small burn
Posted on 7/21/23 at 10:21 am to tonydtigr
quote:
Coming soon to a Cane's near you.
Actually would be easy with them. 99% of the time, the styrofoam box is melted through when I order from there.
Page 2 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News