| shikamaru317 said: Too clarify, I was talking about the lawsuit over the lids of the coffee cups not saying that the coffee was hot, not the other cases. Of course coffee is hot, what kind of idiot needs a warning label that says the coffee is hot? lol |
An 'idiot' who wasn't expecting McDonalds to be intentionally keeping the coffee far hotter than it should have been, so that they could reduce the number of people using their free refill promotion? ^^
Of course people know coffee is hot, which is why the lady was held partly accountable (which reduced her winnings), but she likely wouldn't have suffered the injuries she did had they not been keeping it so hot (something they'd already received 700+ complaints about). There's a difference between expecting something to burn you, and expecting it to start melting your skin off if you spill it. The latter requiring a warning is understandable.
If you're interested there's a pretty good documentary called 'Hot Coffee' that covers the case.
Anyway, i think we're getting a bit off topic 
As for the case this thread is about, i expect it'll be throw out again.
