|
Cut off your finger? Sue
|
Cut off your finger? Sue
On 3/8/2010 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote:
http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Asshat lawyers ... greed rewarding stupidity/personal irresponsibility. -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 10/22/08 KarlC@ (the obvious) |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On 3/8/10 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote:
http://bit.ly/bUTXOP I wonder if Ryobi's lawyers even asked if he took off the saw guard. I would bet a high end SawStop that he no guard on the saw. I also wonder if SawStop is paying dudes to cut off their fingers and sue. :-) -- -MIKE- "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life" --Elvin Jones (1927-2004) -- http://mikedrums.com ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mar 8, 4:26*pm, Swingman wrote:
On 3/8/2010 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Asshat lawyers ... *greed rewarding stupidity/personal irresponsibility.. I couldn't agree more. --www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 10/22/08 KarlC@ (the obvious) |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On 3/8/2010 4:54 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote:
On Mar 8, 4:26 pm, wrote: On 3/8/2010 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Asshat lawyers ... greed rewarding stupidity/personal irresponsibility. I couldn't agree more. My problem isn't with the asshat lawyers but with the asshat judge and asshat jury that let the trial go forward to begin with and then ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. And it shows that the other manufacturers were right to not back sawstop--exactly what was predicted is taking place and in a few years from now the affordable power saw will cease to exist as they become laden with lawyer-induced safety features each of which adds its increment of cost. |
Cut off your finger? Sue
"GarageWoodworks" wrote http://bit.ly/bUTXOP Suing after you cut your finger off is dumb. Recently I find myself full of fear every time I want to cut a piece of wood on my saw. I'm a nervous wreck and the stress is not good for me. I'm going to sue so they put a flesh detecting device on my saw and enough money for a relaxing vacation. Get my lawyer on the phone. |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mar 8, 3:21*pm, GarageWoodworks
wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP ---www.garagewoodworks.com HHHMMMMmmmmmm. Which pinkie could I do without? Hmmmmmmmm! RonB |
Cut off your finger? Sue
Swingman writes:
On 3/8/2010 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Asshat lawyers ... greed rewarding stupidity/personal irresponsibility. Won't survive appeal. It's a shame that the lawyers will be the only ones to win, here. scott |
Table Saw Safety was Cut off your finger? Sue
-MIKE- writes:
On 3/8/10 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP I wonder if Ryobi's lawyers even asked if he took off the saw guard. I would bet a high end SawStop that he no guard on the saw. I've seen a couple of construction workers and a bunch of amateur homeowners crosscutting freehand on these portable table saws. They eventually get what they deserve. scott |
Table Saw Safety was Cut off your finger? Sue
On 3/8/2010 4:49 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
writes: On 3/8/10 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP I wonder if Ryobi's lawyers even asked if he took off the saw guard. I would bet a high end SawStop that he no guard on the saw. I've seen a couple of construction workers and a bunch of amateur homeowners crosscutting freehand on these portable table saws. They eventually get what they deserve. "Carlos Osorio", a hardwood floor installer ... hmmmmm, wonder if he was fresh from Home Depot? This guy, nails it: http://www.protoolreviews.com/news/e...e-saw-not-good -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 10/22/08 KarlC@ (the obvious) |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On 03/08/2010 03:26 PM, Swingman wrote:
On 3/8/2010 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Asshat lawyers ... greed rewarding stupidity/personal irresponsibility. I dislike lawyers as much as the next guy...but I also think it's a bit odd that none of the other manufacturers has even attempted to come up with something similar. Surely the Sawstop guys haven't locked down the patents that tightly. In the interest of full disclosure, I don't own a Sawstop but I'd use one if someone bought it for me. :) Chris |
Cut off your finger? Sue
In ,
Scott Lurndal spewed forth: Swingman writes: On 3/8/2010 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Asshat lawyers ... greed rewarding stupidity/personal irresponsibility. Won't survive appeal. It's a shame that the lawyers will be the only ones to win, here. scott Don't bet on it |
Cut off your finger? Sue
In ,
GarageWoodworks spewed forth: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com absurd Someone PLEASE add more chlorine to the gene pool |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 17:33:18 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote: On 3/8/2010 4:54 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: On Mar 8, 4:26 pm, wrote: On 3/8/2010 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Asshat lawyers ... greed rewarding stupidity/personal irresponsibility. I couldn't agree more. My problem isn't with the asshat lawyers but with the asshat judge and asshat jury that let the trial go forward to begin with and then ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. And it shows that the other manufacturers were right to not back sawstop--exactly what was predicted is taking place and in a few years from now the affordable power saw will cease to exist as they become laden with lawyer-induced safety features each of which adds its increment of cost. Not to mention that the ass hat *could* have bought a Saw Stop if his finger were that important to him. Seems he is the *only* negligent one. |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 17:34:23 -0500, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote:
"GarageWoodworks" wrote http://bit.ly/bUTXOP Suing after you cut your finger off is dumb. Recently I find myself full of fear every time I want to cut a piece of wood on my saw. I'm a nervous wreck and the stress is not good for me. I'm going to sue so they put a flesh detecting device on my saw and enough money for a relaxing vacation. Have a beer. I'll sooth your nerves. Get my lawyer on the phone. |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On 3/8/2010 5:13 PM, Chris Friesen wrote:
I dislike lawyers as much as the next guy...but I also think it's a bit odd that none of the other manufacturers has even attempted to come up with something similar. Surely the Sawstop guys haven't locked down the patents that tightly. The "guy", Steve Gass, _is_ a patent attorney. Like they say ... one lawyer in a town will starve to death, two and they'll both get rich. -- www.e-woodshop.net Last update: 10/22/08 KarlC@ (the obvious) |
Cut off your finger? Sue
"GarageWoodworks" wrote in message ... http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Irrational... if it was so important why did he buy the saw he purchased? Due to the irrationality of this suit that gene pool may need terming... He cut the wrong part off for that though... |
Table Saw Safety was Cut off your finger? Sue
On 3/8/10 8:32 PM, Swingman wrote:
To you and KW... I clearly stated, "I wholeheartedly agree they shouldn't be trying to "legislate itself into millions." Relax, just trying to dipstick your ken of the historical context. Don't worry, they have NO history, whatsoever, of doing it out of simple "goodwill". If they were trying to lobby for legislation to mandate the use of their product, at least they have a solution to a real problem, not the made-up BS that a certain former politician is trying to push down our throats to pad his pockets. :-) -- -MIKE- "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life" --Elvin Jones (1927-2004) -- http://mikedrums.com ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply |
Cut off your finger? Sue
So now when you buy a table saw you will have to sign a liability
release that you understand that it doesn't have this safety device and the manufacuturers will have to offer safety classes which have been available at the better dealers. Its like the notices on generators in a dozen languages that says don't run them in your house. If you buy something it should be your responsibility to know what your getting into. If your operating equipment it should be the same. Mike M On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:44:51 -0600, Swingman wrote: On 3/8/2010 6:08 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: On 03/08/2010 05:35 PM, Swingman wrote: On 3/8/2010 5:13 PM, Chris Friesen wrote: I dislike lawyers as much as the next guy...but I also think it's a bit odd that none of the other manufacturers has even attempted to come up with something similar. Surely the Sawstop guys haven't locked down the patents that tightly. The "guy", Steve Gass, _is_ a patent attorney. He also has a doctorate in physics and claims to have started woodworking at age 4. The fact that someone who invents something useful happens to be an attorney shouldn't be held against them. By dint of name alone, "lawyers" need little else be held against them... :) Like they say ... one lawyer in a town will starve to death, two and they'll both get rich. Sure. And I know there was some interesting happenings in the early days of his idea when he wanted a pretty good premium for the use of the concept. A "licensing fee", and apparently nothing has changed with regard to same. But all the other companies all have patent attorneys as well. I have a hard time believing that nobody else in the entire industry could have come up with a flesh-sensing device of their own after the better part of a decade. I'd say get used to it, because it's painfully obvious that that's the case. |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 18:18:55 -0600, Swingman wrote:
On 3/8/2010 5:57 PM, John Grossbohlin wrote: "GarageWoodworks" wrote in message ... http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Irrational... if it was so important why did he buy the saw he purchased? Due to the irrationality of this suit that gene pool may need terming... He cut the wrong part off for that though... A bit too much in line with the original legal maneuvering and machinations of the lawyer inventor. Color me cynical, but with that name, and occupation as hardwood floor installer, odds are that this is a carefully selected case, tried in a carefully selected venue, with the plaintiff as a convenient 'victim of opportunity', by greedy lawyers on contingency, and with more than just the stink of collusion of similar financial interests. Wouldn't surprise me seems to me they tried to get OSHA to cram it down everyones throat and it didn't fly. Mike M |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On 3/9/2010 12:33 AM, Mike M wrote:
So now when you buy a table saw you will have to sign a liability release that you understand that it doesn't have this safety device and the manufacuturers will have to offer safety classes which have been available at the better dealers. Its like the notices on generators in a dozen languages that says don't run them in your house. If you buy something it should be your responsibility to know what your getting into. If your operating equipment it should be the same. That ship sailed when the Stupid Old Bat successfully sued McDonalds for spilling coffee in her lap. Until somebody shoots every lawyer in Congress and shoots the next batch that gets elected and keeps shooting them until no lawyer dares run for Congress that's not going to get fixed. Should have been in the Constitution--no person who has ever worked as a lawyer should be eligible for Congress. |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mar 8, 4:21*pm, GarageWoodworks
wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP ---www.garagewoodworks.com Two questions: 1. Did SawStop fund this guys legal fight? 2. What do regular folks do when they want to sell there table saw to upgrade? This decision blows! |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:26:15 -0600, the infamous Swingman
scrawled the following: On 3/8/2010 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Asshat lawyers ... greed rewarding stupidity/personal irresponsibility. How do I word this softly? "I can't wait for some idiot to get hurt on his SawStop saw to prove that they can't keep idiots from hurting themselves." How about new legislation, mandating that "any lawyer who loses a frivial case has to suffer that malady he was ranting about"? (frivial = trivial + frivolous) -- Stay centered by accepting whatever you are doing. This is the ultimate. -- Chuang-tzu |
Cut off your finger? Sue
GarageWoodworks wrote:
http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com So lets see, the inventor of Saw Stop is a Patent Attorney and gets bored with not making money with his chosen career. Dreams up this idea of a Table Saw that can stop the blade on contact with flesh. Tries to push this new tech. on Saw Manufactures and fails. Decides to start his own Table Saw Manufacture. I would imagine sales are decent but not decent enough for the inventor so decides to lobby for this new tech. on every table saw built today. If the millionaire wins he becomes a billionaire. Somehow I get the feeling this was the plan when he started the patent process. Now that's what I call a "Great Business Plan", at of course the expense of Table Saw Manufactures and Table Saw users all over the world!!!! And of course Congress will probably go along with it, since they see the US citizen as dumb asses with the need to nanny state everything. You can lead them to LINUX but you can't make them THINK ! Mandriva 2010 using KDE 4.3 Website: www.rentmyhusband.biz |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mar 9, 10:38*am, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:26:15 -0600, the infamous Swingman scrawled the following: On 3/8/2010 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com Asshat lawyers ... *greed rewarding stupidity/personal irresponsibility. How do I word this softly? "I can't wait for some idiot to get hurt on his SawStop saw to prove that they can't keep idiots from hurting themselves." Now *there* is a suit. They're advertising that they will protect you from yourself! How about new legislation, mandating that "any lawyer who loses a frivial case has to suffer that malady he was ranting about"? (frivial = trivial + frivolous) Wouldn't that be trialous? ;-) |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:02:46 -0500, the infamous "J. Clarke"
scrawled the following: On 3/9/2010 12:33 AM, Mike M wrote: So now when you buy a table saw you will have to sign a liability release that you understand that it doesn't have this safety device and the manufacuturers will have to offer safety classes which have been available at the better dealers. Its like the notices on generators in a dozen languages that says don't run them in your house. If you buy something it should be your responsibility to know what your getting into. If your operating equipment it should be the same. That ship sailed when the Stupid Old Bat successfully sued McDonalds for spilling coffee in her lap. I think I left the word "remittitured" out of my last post on this subject. (had to look it up and forgot to go back) The judge seriously reduced the award, giving her only her medical costs, legal costs, and a tiny sum which is not to be discussed openly. Until somebody shoots every lawyer in Congress and shoots the next batch that gets elected and keeps shooting them until no lawyer dares run for Congress that's not going to get fixed. Should have been in the Constitution--no person who has ever worked as a lawyer should be eligible for Congress. CONgresscritters should start out their careers with a 2-year stretch of hard time in a maximum-security pen. Those who survive might be a bit better grounded on the necessities of life. The Constitution also should have stated that "Anyone who _seeks_ to be in office shall never be allowed to do so." The Founders were all hesitant obligers, and that turned out very well. Look what we have now! Disgusting. -- Stay centered by accepting whatever you are doing. This is the ultimate. -- Chuang-tzu |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 17:35:12 -0600, the infamous
" scrawled the following: On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 17:34:23 -0500, "Ed Pawlowski" wrote: "GarageWoodworks" wrote http://bit.ly/bUTXOP Suing after you cut your finger off is dumb. Recently I find myself full of fear every time I want to cut a piece of wood on my saw. I'm a nervous wreck and the stress is not good for me. I'm going to sue so they put a flesh detecting device on my saw and enough money for a relaxing vacation. Have a beer. I'll sooth your nerves. Get my lawyer on the phone. Better yet, if you go drink a fifth of bourbon before using the saw, you can sue both the distillery and the sawmaker, you wonderful guy! -- Stay centered by accepting whatever you are doing. This is the ultimate. -- Chuang-tzu |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 17:27:34 -0600, the infamous "ChairMan"
scrawled the following: In , GarageWoodworks spewed forth: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP --- www.garagewoodworks.com absurd Someone PLEASE add more chlorine to the gene pool Attorneys are the anti-chlorine in our gene pool. -- Stay centered by accepting whatever you are doing. This is the ultimate. -- Chuang-tzu |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:36:44 -0600, the infamous Swingman
scrawled the following: On 3/8/2010 7:21 PM, John Grossbohlin wrote: "Joe" wrote in message .. . I'd be curious to know if he was free handing cuts at the time... If so he certainly wouldn't be the first flooring guy to guide wood through the blade sans fence or miter gauge... thinking about doing that for cross cuts gives me the heebie-jeebies.... for rips? Doesn't even bear thinking about. I mean, I guy could lose a finger doing tha.... wait, nevermind... Ya think...?? LOL ... like the Forrest blade guys at the WW shows, using one of those little table top saws for demoing paper thin cuts, on a 2"x4"x6" slab of hardwood, freehand. What are they gonna do now? :) Remember the video of the guy doing freehand cuts on the big bandsaw, ending up with a reindeer at the end? I was in mortal fear of his fingers the whole way. -- Stay centered by accepting whatever you are doing. This is the ultimate. -- Chuang-tzu |
Cut off your finger? Sue
Mike M wrote:
So now when you buy a table saw you will have to sign a liability release that you understand that it doesn't have this safety device and the manufacuturers will have to offer safety classes which have been available at the better dealers. Its like the notices on generators in a dozen languages that says don't run them in your house. If you buy something it should be your responsibility to know what your getting into. If your operating equipment it should be the same. Imagine the Far Side cartoon showing a horde of Vikings storming the castle. Arrows are flying, boiling oil being poured, swords vs. axes on the ramparts, and on the top of the nearest scaling ladder: "Not a Step!" |
Cut off your finger? Sue
"Evodawg" wrote in message ... So lets see, the inventor of Saw Stop is a Patent Attorney and gets bored with not making money with his chosen career. Dreams up this idea of a Table Saw that can stop the blade on contact with flesh. Tries to push this new tech. on Saw Manufactures and fails. Decides to start his own Table Saw Manufacture. I would imagine sales are decent but not decent enough for the inventor so decides to lobby for this new tech. on every table saw built today. If the millionaire wins he becomes a billionaire. Somehow I get the feeling this was the plan when he started the patent process. Now that's what I call a "Great Business Plan", at of course the expense of Table Saw Manufactures and Table Saw users all over the world!!!! This is the part of this discussion that I just don't get. Someone invents something that actually does have a value and a purpose, and tries to grab the brass ring. Hell - that is the American way. What is wrong with that? So he tried to get his invention adopted by all of the manufacturers, so he started his own company because they all turned him down. What's the big deal? How is that at the expense of table saw manufacturers? Or users? You can fault his attempts to mandate his invention by law, but I'm not even sure I'd fault him for that effort. Any expense to table saw manufacturers lies solely at the feet of the legal system. Narrow that down a little further - to the jury system. Your neighbors and mine. You can't even fault the lawyers - all they do is argue a case. Both sides argue opposing sides. It's the people in the box that make the decision. -- -Mike- |
Table Saw Safety was Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:14:34 -0500, wrote:
On 08 Mar 2010 22:49:57 GMT, (Scott Lurndal) wrote: -MIKE- writes: On 3/8/10 3:21 PM, GarageWoodworks wrote: http://bit.ly/bUTXOP I wonder if Ryobi's lawyers even asked if he took off the saw guard. I would bet a high end SawStop that he no guard on the saw. I've seen a couple of construction workers and a bunch of amateur homeowners crosscutting freehand on these portable table saws. They eventually get what they deserve. scott Some of us would rather be retain possession of all our digits - fingers are more useful than lawsuits. I have some small stock (1x2) that needs to be cut to length (maybe 5 mnutes?) but it can wait until morning when I'm not fighting a sinus headache.. John ....I don't use a guard on my Skilsaw(s), because that's how I was taught and have vast experience with. I don't let anyone else use my Skilsaw(s) unless they're equally experienced. Sam Maloof used his bandsaw in the same manner, and cautioned his audience similarly, too. Times change, though, and soon enough there will be fewer and fewer of us Dinos...but you'll be able to use my Powermatic 66 *long* after I'm gone...cut and count will be around for awhile yet... AFA Mr. Osario...too bad you took that first puff... gc |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mar 9, 11:44*am, "Mike Marlow"
wrote: "Evodawg" wrote in message ... So lets see, the inventor of Saw Stop is a Patent Attorney and gets bored with not making money with his chosen career. Dreams up this idea of a Table Saw that can stop the blade on contact with flesh. Tries to push this new tech. on Saw Manufactures and fails. Decides to start his own Table Saw Manufacture. I would imagine sales are decent but not decent enough for the inventor so decides to lobby for this new tech. on every table saw built today. If the millionaire wins he becomes a billionaire.. Somehow I get the feeling this was the plan when he started the patent process. Now that's what I call a "Great Business Plan", at of course the expense of Table Saw Manufactures and Table Saw users all over the world!!!! This is the part of this discussion that I just don't get. *Someone invents something that actually does have a value and a purpose, and tries to grab the brass ring. *Hell - that is the American way. *What is wrong with that? So he tried to get his invention adopted by all of the manufacturers, so he started his own company because they all turned him down. *What's the big deal? *How is that at the expense of table saw manufacturers? *Or users? So far, nothing - read on. You can fault his attempts to mandate his invention by law, but I'm not even sure I'd fault him for that effort. * You appear to be the only one here. You don't see a conflict of interest? He has a state-mandated monopoly (patent) and you don't see a problem with the state also requiring his device? boggle Any expense to table saw manufacturers lies solely at the feet of the legal system. *Narrow that down a little further - to the jury system. *Your neighbors and mine. *You can't even fault the lawyers - all they do is argue a case. *Both sides argue opposing sides. *It's the people in the box that make the decision. ....and you think this is goodness? Get real! Saws are dangerous things. We *all* know it, as did the PROFESSIONAL. Whether we *choose* to use a dangerous tool is our business, not the nanny-state's. |
Cut off your finger? Sue
Mike Marlow wrote:
"Evodawg" wrote in message ... So lets see, the inventor of Saw Stop is a Patent Attorney and gets bored with not making money with his chosen career. Dreams up this idea of a Table Saw that can stop the blade on contact with flesh. Tries to push this new tech. on Saw Manufactures and fails. Decides to start his own Table Saw Manufacture. I would imagine sales are decent but not decent enough for the inventor so decides to lobby for this new tech. on every table saw built today. If the millionaire wins he becomes a billionaire. Somehow I get the feeling this was the plan when he started the patent process. Now that's what I call a "Great Business Plan", at of course the expense of Table Saw Manufactures and Table Saw users all over the world!!!! This is the part of this discussion that I just don't get. Someone invents something that actually does have a value and a purpose, and tries to grab the brass ring. Hell - that is the American way. What is wrong with that? So he tried to get his invention adopted by all of the manufacturers, so he started his own company because they all turned him down. What's the big deal? This part of the story is fine and yes it is a wonderful invention. I agree with his business plan up to this point. How is that at the expense of table saw manufacturers? Or users? You can fault his attempts to mandate his invention by law, but I'm not even sure I'd fault him for that effort. Any expense to table saw manufacturers lies solely at the feet of the legal system. Narrow that down a little further - to the jury system. Your neighbors and mine. You can't even fault the lawyers - all they do is argue a case. Both sides argue opposing sides. It's the people in the box that make the decision. This is where I have a problem. Mandate this invention on all Table Saws? This is just an attempt to force his will on all. I have a really big problem with that!!! You can buy a small table table saw for around 100.00. I use an old Delta which I will call a Miniature Table Saw probably 2-3 times a week, (off site portable) which I paid 80.00. How much would it cost to put this SS invention on this saw? More then the saw is worth. If you can't figure out that using a table saw is dangerous and you need to use special precautions then you have no reason using it. Have no problem signing an agreement to hold harmless saw manufactures without SS. -- You can lead them to LINUX but you can't make them THINK ! Mandriva 2010 using KDE 4.3 Website: www.rentmyhusband.biz |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:02:46 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote: That ship sailed when the Stupid Old Bat successfully sued McDonalds for spilling coffee in her lap. McDonalds was serving their coffee at a much higher temperture than the industry standard. While you'd expect to get a minor burn from spilling hot coffee on yourself in this case it was a certainty that she would receive severe burns and would not have if they followed the standard. -Kevin |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On 3/9/10 12:26 PM, Kevin wrote:
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:02:46 -0500, "J. Clarke" wrote: That ship sailed when the Stupid Old Bat successfully sued McDonalds for spilling coffee in her lap. McDonalds was serving their coffee at a much higher temperture than the industry standard. While you'd expect to get a minor burn from spilling hot coffee on yourself in this case it was a certainty that she would receive severe burns and would not have if they followed the standard. -Kevin Plus, apparently, McD's had been warned several times or sued before about it or something like that, and that's why the judge ruled in favor of the lady. Also, while we think the amount was ridiculous, the way the judge came up with it, was to calculate the a single day's coffee sales for McD's. It's akin to fining a MLB player $20,000 for doing something wrong. It's less than they make for a single at bat. -- -MIKE- "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life" --Elvin Jones (1927-2004) -- http://mikedrums.com ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On Mar 9, 12:26*pm, Kevin wrote:
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:02:46 -0500, "J. Clarke" wrote: That ship sailed when the Stupid Old Bat successfully sued McDonalds for spilling coffee in her lap. McDonalds was serving their coffee at a much higher temperture than the industry standard. This is a lie that has been handed down for ages. The coffee was served at a customary serving temperature (180F). Dunkin' Donuts served coffee at *exactly* the same temperature (their spec was 180F +/- 3F) at the time. *While you'd expect to get a minor burn from spilling hot coffee on yourself in this case it was a certainty that she would receive severe burns and would not have if they followed the standard. * BS. You don't want burns, don't put a cup of coffee between your legs. |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On 3/9/2010 1:26 PM, Kevin wrote:
On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:02:46 -0500, "J. Clarke" wrote: That ship sailed when the Stupid Old Bat successfully sued McDonalds for spilling coffee in her lap. McDonalds was serving their coffee at a much higher temperture than the industry standard. Bull****. There is in fact a published standard and it calls for coffee being served at the temperature McDonalds uses. The lawyers went around and found some crappy diners and the like that served lukewarm coffee and claimed that that was some kind of "standard". Some years later there was a lawsuit initiated against Bunn-O-Matic, the company that makes the coffee makers used by McDonalds and just about every other restaurant in the US and they trotted out the published standard and that was the end of that suit. While you'd expect to get a minor burn from spilling hot coffee on yourself in this case it was a certainty that she would receive severe burns and would not have if they followed the standard. And I'm sure that any liability lawyer would be more than happy to have a gullible fool like you in his jury pool. |
Cut off your finger? Sue
On 3/9/2010 1:37 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
On 3/9/10 12:26 PM, Kevin wrote: On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 08:02:46 -0500, "J. Clarke" wrote: That ship sailed when the Stupid Old Bat successfully sued McDonalds for spilling coffee in her lap. McDonalds was serving their coffee at a much higher temperture than the industry standard. While you'd expect to get a minor burn from spilling hot coffee on yourself in this case it was a certainty that she would receive severe burns and would not have if they followed the standard. -Kevin Plus, apparently, McD's had been warned several times or sued before about it or something like that, and that's why the judge ruled in favor of the lady. They had been sued. They had not been "warned". Are you suggesting that someone bringing suit in and of itself constitutes evidence of wrongdoing? Also, while we think the amount was ridiculous, the way the judge came up with it, was to calculate the a single day's coffee sales for McD's. It's akin to fining a MLB player $20,000 for doing something wrong. It's less than they make for a single at bat. The woman came to grief because of her own stupidity. McD was following published industry standards. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:43 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter