On 4 Jan 2006 10:43:43 -0800, "rigger" wrote:

You can rant all you want but the following is indisputable:
McDonalds is a careful company well experienced in defending law suits.
A jury, who was present through all phases of the trial found in favor
of the plaintiff.

and what is also indisputable is what i've been trying to say: the
temperature issue so dominant in the liebeck case has been
successfully refuted in every single similar suit since then. these,
too, were jury trials. the apparent difference was the credible
expert testimony of a recognized coffee expert (who, btw, iirc, is a
chemical engineer, not a lawyer), which seems to have been lacking in
the liebeck case.

fwiw, the temperature standards for coffee brewing, etc, were largely
developed by the coffee brewing center and the coffee brewing
institute in the 1950s and 1960s, long before stella spilled her
coffee. you know, back when people knew coffee was hot.

the temperature "standards" information presented by plaintiff in the
liebeck trial was just plain inaccurate, and mcd's failed to rebutt.
perhaps you know better where to assign fault for that omission, but,
to me, it looks like defense counsel didn't do their homework.

stella may have still prevailed on other issues.