You've been lied to
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 янв 2023
- You may have heard about that "frivolous" lawsuit where a woman sued McDonalds because their coffee was too hot. What you might not have known was that it was really, REALLY hot coffee.... here's the truth about that lawsuit that the headlines don't tell you!
________________________________________________________
Please consider SUBSCRIBING for new videos every week!
Let's connect:
💻 Patreon www.patreon.com/TheLawSaysWhat
🎵 TikTok / the.law.says.what
📸 Instagram / the.law.says.what
📖 If you liked this video, you will LOVE Maclen's book: amzn.to/3g2c9BT
________________________________________________________
LEGAL DISCLAIMERS: everyone's favorite!
1. We are not your attorneys.
2. This is not legal advice.
3. Any unlicensed clips used in this video are for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
4. If you read through all of that, then congratulations and consider applying to law school.
![PIECE BY PIECE - Official Trailer [HD] - Only In Theaters October 11](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/7Bc6trBc1kc/mqdefault.jpg)
It’s even worse than that (though you probably skipped for time), they knew that the coffee should be served cooler, they even knew it was unsafe, but they kept it that hot anyway, despite knowing it was far too hot. The caution hot label should have been for McDonald’s “caution extremely unsuitably hot”
People also don't realize that causing change like the warning cups is the whole point of the huge payouts. The judgement has to be enough money that huge corporations - the one at fault and others in the industry - will notice, care about avoiding paying such a judgment in the future, and change their policies
LawHer did a fantastic podcast episode with Red Masel covering this case in more detail! They also covered how the media did this poor woman so dirty in shaming her as "suing for stupid reasons just to make money" when literally all she ever wanted was for Mcdonalds to cover her medical expenses. It's really sad the way the media and society painted her to look.
The woman also decided to hold a cup of coffee in between her legs instead of using her car’s cup holder and to this day Starbucks delivers there average coffee at 190°.
This woman should have lost the case.
She wasn't driving, her grandson was and they were in a parked car. She had the coffee cup between her legs while she was putting in her sugar and cream, with her intending on putting it in the cup holder when she was finished. The coffee spilled before she could do so and she always maintained that SHE'S the one that spilled the coffee. The lawsuit was about negligence on McDonald's end for serving a coffee so hot it melts your skin off on contact.
You should be able to make a clumsy mistake and not have your flesh melt away in your own car, from a drink intended to do consume. What if she hadn't spilt it, but had taken a big gulp not knowing how hot it was and melted her throat tissue? She could've lost the ability to speak?? Or would she have lost for not realising a drink she bought to drink from a fast food chain wasn't safe to drink immediately?
You are wrong
They intentionally served xtra hott coffee
@@tiffanimcmillian3058 same as Starbucks to this day.
@@ryanjohnston3775 According to a USA Today article that came up with a quick google search, Starbucks serves it's coffee between 150-170 degrees. That's at least 20 degrees colder than in the McDonalds case. But I don't see how it's relevant regardless, if Starbucks was doing something wrong, that wouldn't validate McDonalds doing something wrong. Whatever the fact about coffee today, it's not really relevant to this case.