Obituary, NY Times

[ramus]

HUMOR ... LORD KNOWS WE NEED IT .......

At First She Was Puzzled As She Started Reading This Obituary In The Paper. But
Then This Happened

An Obituary printed in the NY Times.....Absolutely
Dead Brilliant!!

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been

with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was, since his birth

records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He will be remembered as

having cultivated such valuable lessons as:

- Knowing when to come in out of the rain;
- Why the early bird gets the worm;
- Life isn't always fair;
- And maybe it was my fault.

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more than

you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in charge).

His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but overbearing

regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy charged with sexual

harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school for using

mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student,

only worsened his condition.

Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the job that

they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly children. It

declined even further when schools were required to get parental consent to

administer sun lotion or an aspirin to a student; but could not inform parents

when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses; and

criminals received better treatment than their victims.

Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in

your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault.

Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize

that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was

promptly awarded a huge settlement.

Common Sense was preceded in death,

-by his parents, Truth and Trust,
-by his wife, Discretion,
-by his daughter, Responsibility,
-and by his son, Reason.

He is survived by his 5 stepbrothers;

- I Know My Rights - I Want It Now
- Someone Else Is To Blame
- I'm A Victim
- Pay me for Doing Nothing

Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.
If you still remember him, pass this on. If not, join the majority and do
nothing.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Funny, in a sad sort of way. It perhaps should receive the following annotation:

Undeniable evidence of foul play! Common Sense, cornered and ambushed in a dark ally, a la Julius Caesar, before being beaten and stabbed by a pack of hungry dogs called Nihilism, Narcissism, Post-Modern Social Liberalism, and finally, fatally, by Political Correctness until he was dead, dead, dead.

It is said several bystanders witnessed the attack, but were intercepted by a third party, called Bribery. They walked away laughing, pockets bulging, and did not look back.

[ramus]

Well done ....

[RunningDeer]

Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.

An information post:




“The coffee that burned 79-year old Stella Liebeck was dangerously hot – hot enough to cause third-degree burns, even through clothes, in three seconds. Liebeck endured third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, including her inner thighs and genitals – the skin was burned away to the layers of muscle and fatty tissue. She had to be hospitalized for eight days, and she required skin grafts and other treatment. Her recovery lasted two years.

Even with all of that pain and agony, Liebeck made an offer to settle with McDonaldʼs for $20,000 to cover costs associated with the injury. McDonaldʼs countered with an offer of $800. Liebeck pursued the case in court; and not to gouge the fast food giant for cash, but to make a difference.”


*****

The Real Story Behind the McDonaldʼs Hot Coffee Lawsuit.

In 1992, 79-year old Stella Liebeck became the poster child for frivolous litigation after filing a lawsuit against McDonaldʼs for serving coffee that was too hot.

The public generally ridiculed Liebeck – the media hook was the story of an Albuquerque woman who cleaned up with $2.7 million for spilling coffee on herself. News stations took her to task, late night comedians had a field day.

But did any of us really know the details of the story?

With the opening of Ralph Naderʼs new American Museum of Tort Law in Winsted, Connecticut, the truth behind some of the more enduring cases of corporate shenanigans are explored. Among histories of exploding Ford Pintos and Joe Camel, the facts behind Liebeckʼs case come to light.

As the museum states:

The coffee that burned Stella Liebeck was dangerously hot – hot enough to cause third-degree burns, even through clothes, in three seconds. Liebeck endured third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, including her inner thighs and genitals – the skin was burned away to the layers of muscle and fatty tissue. She had to be hospitalized for eight days, and she required skin grafts and other treatment. Her recovery lasted two years.

Even with all of that pain and agony, Liebeck made an offer to settle with McDonaldʼs for $20,000 to cover costs associated with the injury. McDonaldʼs countered with an offer of $800. Liebeck pursued the case in court; and not to gouge the fast food giant for cash, but to make a difference.

At home, most coffee makers brew a drink that measures between 135 and 150 degrees Fahrenheit. Some restaurants go a bit hotter, up to 160 F; that temperature can cause third-degree burns in 20 seconds, which gives people enough time to wipe it off before it does too much damage.

“We knew, before the lawsuit was filed, that the temperature of the water was 190 F or so, and the franchise documents required that of the franchisee,” said Kenneth Wagner, a lawyer who represented Liebeck.

700 other people prior to Liebeck had suffered from McDonaldʼs scalding coffee, yet the company maintained its policy. “The company knew its coffee was causing serious burns,” notes the museum, “but it decided that, with billions of cups served annually, this number of burns was not significant.” Liebeck was concerned about the others who had burned, and especially that the 700 other victims included children.

“Our position was that the product was unreasonably dangerous, and the temperature should have been lower,” Wagner said.

Liebeck was awarded $200,000 in compensation for her pain and medical costs, a figure that was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found her 20 percent responsible. They also awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages, which the trial judge reduced to $480,000, even though he called McDonaldʼs behavior had been “willful, wanton, and reckless.” The final settlement was even less.

Consumer advocates suggest that painting McDonaldʼs as the victim was a way for business interests and certain lawmakers to create a narrative about frivolous lawsuits in an effort to advance a tort reform agenda that would hamper consumer rights and strengthen a lack of corporate accountability.

On the one hand truly frivolous lawsuits make sensible people want to bang their heads against the wall, but the importance of holding corporations responsible for wrongdoing shouldnʼt be diminished. “Tort law is being run into the ground, maligned, caricatured and slandered because itʼs effective,” says Nader, who described the conservative agenda of tort reform, which seeks limits on lawsuits and financial awards, as “the cruelest movement Iʼve ever encountered.”

Which is why now you can go to a museum in Winsted, Connecticut and look at exhibits starring Erin Brockovich and Big Tobacco ... and a senior citizen in Albuquerque, New Mexico, who was concerned about kids getting burned by hot coffee.

[article (http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/truth-behind-mcdonalds-hot-coffee-lawsuit.html)]

[ramus]

Once again msm fails to deliver the truth ... Very sorry for her pain and suffering .. They could have left that out of the obituary .. They didn't know

either i would guess ..

[ceetee9]

Nice piece. Thank you ramus. I must agree that common sense has, apparently, died—although I find it interesting coming from the New York Times.

And I found RunningDeer's comment (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?97101-Obituary-NY-Times&p=1145819&viewfull=1#post1145819) interesting as well—although I'm not sure whether to thank her or curse her for piquing my interest and the 3+ hours I spent researching the Liebeck v. McDonald's case and hot coffee. ;) However, since I spent that time I thought I'd relate some of what I found and why it piqued my interest.

I vaguely remember the McDonald's coffee case but I do remember that I had mixed feelings about it then and, after doing a little research, I discovered that I still feel pretty much the same way now. That being that both McDonald's and Mrs. Liebeck were negligent. While I have sympathy for the pain and suffering Mrs. Liebeck incurred from the scalding coffee she certainly had to know that McDonald's coffee (as most fast food and gas station coffees) are absurdly hot. Just holding the cup for any length of time should tell you that. I mean, what could possibly go wrong with placing hot coffee between your knees while attempting to pry the lid off?

Likewise, McDonald's was aware that their hot coffee had caused hundreds of scalding incidents over the years yet they neglected to do anything to correct the problem. Their appears to be a precedent with megacorporations that it is cheaper to settle lawsuits (and bind the plaintiffs to silence on the settlement) than to correct issues with their products or services that could cost far more. And it should be clear to anyone, who's been paying any attention at all, that the laws are skewed in the corporations favor and who we can thank for that.

Anyway, from the article that RunningDeer cited I read many of the comments as well and there were a few that had some good points that I attempted to verify. Whether a “styrofoam” cup can melt at 180-212 degrees is immaterial since the cup (whether styrofoam or not) did not melt but was tipped over by Mrs. Liebeck while attempting to pry the lid off. Further, I didn't find any confirmation that consumer coffeemakers brew coffee at 135-150 degrees. In fact, neither Mr. Coffee or Cuisinart mentioned any brewing temperature in their manuals. The only thing I found related to potential danger from scalding was “Scalding may occur if the lid is removed during the brewing cycle.”

And from the Burn Foundation (http://www.burnfoundation.org/programs/resource.cfm?c=1&a=3) this:
When tap water reaches 140º F, it can cause a third degree (full thickness) burn in just five seconds
in 1 second at 156º
in 2 seconds at 149º
in 5 seconds at 140º
in 15 seconds at 133º.

I won't cite the other articles I read as they echoed, for the most part, the TreeHugger.com article cited by RunningDeer.

My take away from this little exercise just reaffirms what I already knew. No matter what side you take on this issue (or any issue for that matter) you can find plenty of crap to support your opinions, arguments and agenda. While I still don't know whether it is necessary for coffee to be brewed at 180-190 degrees (to “extract the flavor” from the beans) to get a good cup of coffee, for me the truth of the matter is still: Yes, corporations are out of control and are given far too much leeway so they can skirt their responsibilities in the name of ever increasing profits (and they need to be reined in), but we (the people) still have to take responsibility for our actions. I think Mrs. Liebeck was rewarded adequately for her pain and suffering especially when she should have known better than to open a scalding hot cup of coffee between her legs (i.e., anyone who has ever bought a cup of coffee at McDonald's—or any fast food restaurant or gas station for that matter—knows the coffee is ridiculously hot). And I do think McDonald's acted irresponsibly when confronted with hundreds of scalding reports over years and did nothing to change their brewing temperature policy. I personally don't believe it is necessary to brew coffee so hot, but, even if it is, they could do something to cool the temperature to a less dangerous level (while still maintaining taste) before serving it to their customers, but that's a subject for more research—which I'm not prone to do at this point.

[RunningDeer]

No matter what side you take on this issue (or any issue for that matter) you can find plenty of crap to support your opinions, arguments and agenda.

I agree, ceetee9. Here are several more, including Mrs. Liebeck and her family in the video.

Documentary Feature Film (http://www.hotcoffeethemovie.com/default.asp?pg=mcdonalds_case), “Hot Coffee: is Justice Being Served? - Sundance Film Festival

From the 'Lectric Law Library's Stacks (http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm) - The Actual Facts About - The Mcdonalds' Coffee Case




"...After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap.

The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused."


Consumer Attorneys’ of California (https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts):




In a story about the case published shortly after the verdict was delivered in 1994, one of the jurors said over the course of the trial he came to realize the case was about “callous disregard for the safety of the people.” Another juror said “the facts were so overwhelmingly against the company.”

That’s because those jurors were able to hear all the facts — including those presented by McDonald’s — and see the extent of Mrs. Liebeck’s injuries. Ask anyone who criticizes the case as a “frivolous lawsuit” that resulted in “jackpot justice” if they have done the same.




Woman Burned by McDonald's Hot Coffee, Then the News Media
pCkL9UlmCOE

Published on Oct 21, 2013

In 1992, Stella Liebeck spilled scalding McDonald's coffee in her lap and later sued the company, attracting a flood of negative attention. It turns out there was more to the story.

Read the story here: http://nyti.ms/1fQhhoR