RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Tantriqu -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 9:02:24 AM)

Tea is supposed to be made with briskly boiling water: >75'C [I can't remember your antique system anymore: divide by 5, multiply by 9, + 32 = 167' F-student] for green, and as close to 100'C [212] as possible for black tea.
Sorry about her child and hope he's ok, but a big Darwinistic DUH for the mom: unless she ordered iced tea, she knew to expect a scalding-hot as well as over-priced beverage.



Missokyst -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 9:05:37 AM)

Baby's flesh is more sensitive to heat than normal adults. It might not have scalded an adult, and if it was hot, an adult would work quickly to make it better.
quote:

ORIGINAL: DCWoody

It doesn't seem sensible to serve something hot enough to scald, for immediate human consumption.




domiguy -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 9:07:12 AM)

Maybe she hates her kids because she found another man....drowning them in the lake is so 1994 and there is little money in it.



Louve00 -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 10:01:16 AM)

Maybe there should be a policy that you can't sell hot anything to a mother (or person) traveling with a child, unless they sign a waiver agreeing not to hold the establishment serving it responsible if the patron spills it on themself or the child.  That's about as dumb as a lawsuit against a business that sells hot food or drink.  But stupid is as stupid does.  [8|]



Aylee -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 10:19:08 AM)

How badly was the baby hurt?  [:(]  And is it okay now?



LafayetteLady -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 11:04:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tantriqu

Tea is supposed to be made with briskly boiling water: >75'C [I can't remember your antique system anymore: divide by 5, multiply by 9, + 32 = 167' F-student] for green, and as close to 100'C [212] as possible for black tea.
Sorry about her child and hope he's ok, but a big Darwinistic DUH for the mom: unless she ordered iced tea, she knew to expect a scalding-hot as well as over-priced beverage.


I'm no science major either, but I do know that tea, to be brewed correctly, is done with boiling water, which coffe is not.

DonImus,

Personal Injury attorneys all work on a contingency basis in the states, so there is no doubt that he is a "no fee unless you win" attorney. Further, there is a two year statute of limitations on personal injury suits, her filing in less than a year is actually considered quick. In all likelihood, prior to this the attorney had beed in contact with Starbucks regarding the injuries and work out an amicable settlement prior to filing suit. Didn't happen, attorney filed suit. Not only that, it takes time for burns to heal and get a final prognosis regarding the scarring.

LadyEllen,

In the US, unless it is proven that the Plaintiff filed a frivolous suit, she won't be held responsible for costs on the other side. While I agree the merit of this case, based on the information given, is sketchy at best, it does not meet the US requirements for "frivoulous."



marie2 -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 11:38:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

My only thought... who the hell holds a cup of hot anything over a baby?!?!


This is my thought as well. And even if you pick it up and realize that it hurts, you're still going to hold it long enough to put it back down, in order to not let it fall on the baby, even if that means you get a second degree burn on your fingers or hand.

It sounds like a really sad and unfortunate accident, where maybe the mother's hand slipped when she went to pick up the cup, and unfortunately it spilled onto the baby.

Let's say it had a protective sleeve on the cup, she still could faulter or slip or accidentally knock it over. So that was pretty careless of her to not consider the location of her child. And to get down to the nitty gritty, if it didn't have a protective sleeve on it and if it should have been served on a tray, then when she saw that it was not "properly" or "safely" served, she should not have touched the cup.

Having said that, they do make those cup sleeves for a reason. And the reason is that hot beverages poured into those paperish- wax-coated cups, absolutely are hot enough to burn or at least cause immediate severe discomfort to your fingers. That's why people use them. And I do believe that the Starbucks employee who waited on her should have placed a sleeve on the cup, THEN poured the tea into it, but I still think, the responsibility for the accident comes down to the mother in this case. But this is just an opinion based on the information provided.

If I were on the jury, the first thing I'd want to know is whether the cup was placed in front of her empty and then filled up, or whether the server filled it up and then was able to carry the cup in his/her own hands without getting burnt, while placing it in front of the mother.








domiguy -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 1:35:26 PM)

The baby died.



WyldHrt -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 8:15:54 PM)

quote:

And the McDonalds lawsuit is also misrepresented. The lawsuit was real, but the case was different from how it is usually told. She was able to show that McDonalds thought it cheaper to settle hundreds of injury claims before hers, rather than fix the problem. McDonalds' own quality control engineer testified that their coffee indeed was too hot for human consumption (180 degrees, I believe), and that it was a deliberate corporate policy to require franchisees to keep coffee at that temperature. It has since been pointed out that Starbucks, too, served coffee at similar temperatures.

So this new Starbucks lawsuit appears to have some merit.

Very good point (and one I have argued in other threads). I'll be withholding judgment until more of the facts come out. I do know there was a lawsuit against Starbucks in NY, where the server failed to put the lid securely on a cup of tea, resulting in second degree burns when the customer picked it up and it spilled on her.



mikeyOfGeorgia -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 8:31:56 PM)

quote:

Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea


the term "DUH!!!!" comes to mind



tazzygirl -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/5/2010 8:39:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cadenas

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Tea is typically served at 125 degrees. Home hot water heaters are set to just below 120 degrees to prevent scalds. Any parent knows not to hold a cup of hot anything over a child.

Was Starbucks wrong? Dont know, dont know how hot their water was. But the mother has the responsibility of the burns to her own child.


There were at least two previous lawsuits against Starbucks related to hot coffee.

In one case, Starbucks spilled 200 degree coffee over the feet of a New York dancer, who subsequently had to give up ballet dancing.

200 degrees is near boiling, and will scald you within seconds.





There is a difference between the cases.

quote:

Plaintiff was injured when, after ordering a cup of coffee, defendant's employee slid the cup across the counter toward plaintiff causing it to fall over and spill on her left foot. The coffee was between 195 and 205 degrees and caused a second-degree burn, which resulted in permanent nerve damage, leading plaintiff to sometimes experience numbness and a burning sensation in her left foot.


http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2008/2008_05009.htm

In this case, with the dancer, the employee was clearly at fault. No one slides a cup of hot anything across a counter.

In the mother's case, the mother had full control of the tea.



zephyroftheNorth -> RE: Mother suing Starbucks over a "too" hot cup of tea (7/6/2010 3:37:35 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WyldHrt

quote:

And the McDonalds lawsuit is also misrepresented. The lawsuit was real, but the case was different from how it is usually told. She was able to show that McDonalds thought it cheaper to settle hundreds of injury claims before hers, rather than fix the problem. McDonalds' own quality control engineer testified that their coffee indeed was too hot for human consumption (180 degrees, I believe), and that it was a deliberate corporate policy to require franchisees to keep coffee at that temperature. It has since been pointed out that Starbucks, too, served coffee at similar temperatures.

So this new Starbucks lawsuit appears to have some merit.

Very good point (and one I have argued in other threads). I'll be withholding judgment until more of the facts come out. I do know there was a lawsuit against Starbucks in NY, where the server failed to put the lid securely on a cup of tea, resulting in second degree burns when the customer picked it up and it spilled on her.



Same here. I want to know more before passing judgement. I suspect there may be more to this, the article is rather short. What I will say at this point is that Starbuck's coffee is incredibly hot. I have found it near impossible to hold a cup of their coffee even with the sleeve.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875