Stupid Lawsuit

Fushigi

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
2,890
Location
Illinois, USA
Sorry, but for once I'm not even finishing one of Tea's long posts. I buy coffee; I make coffee. I can tell you with a 100% degree of certainty that the coffee I used to get from McD's was at least 20-30 degrees F hotter than I would get from 1) my home coffeepot (a Bunn), 2) the coffeemaker at the office, and 3) any coffeehouse I've ever purchased from, including Starbucks, Caribou, Gloria Jeans, etc. and finally 4) various restaurants and other establishments.


When I buy or make coffee, I can usually sip it right away and out and out gulp it within a couple of minutes. With McD's brew I had to wait at least 10-15 minutes before even sipping. Attempting to drink before it had cooled down always resulted in a minor burn on my toungue, the roof of my mouth, and/or a scalded feeling in my upper throat. On the occasions when I actually ate there, I mostly couldn't even start the cofee until I had finished the entire meal it was supposed to go with. Adding cold 'cream' didn't seem to help much.

That is too hot. I don't care what temp ranges you define; when I can drink coffee from pretty much anywhere in the world (well, OK, just North America and Europe) right away yet I have to wait 10+ minutes for McD's coffee to cool before I can drink it, McD's was serving it too hot.

BTW, you may have noticed my past-tense with reference to visiting McDonalds. I have not purchased anything from there since 2001. They've never been a favorite, but the food seemed to be slipping in quality and, as a final straw, I had three errors on a single order (short-changed, undercooked beef, and regular cola when I ordered diet). After that, I wrote them off as hopeless.

Now, regarding the case, the woman did not take proper precautions WRT proper care and handling of a hot beverage. However, the beverage itself was served hotter than industry norms. Both parties should share the blame, but I'd say McD's has a higher degree of responsibility as it could be argued their product was faulty and that the results of her inadequate precautions would not have been nearly as severe if the coffee had been at a more normal temperature..
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,278
Fushigi said:
Sorry, but for once I'm not even finishing one of Tea's long posts. I buy coffee; I make coffee. I can tell you with a 100% degree of certainty that the coffee I used to get from McD's was at least 20-30 degrees F hotter than I would get from 1) my home coffeepot (a Bunn), 2) the coffeemaker at the office, and 3) any coffeehouse I've ever purchased from, including Starbucks, Caribou, Gloria Jeans, etc. and finally 4) various restaurants and other establishments.


When I buy or make coffee, I can usually sip it right away and out and out gulp it within a couple of minutes. With McD's brew I had to wait at least 10-15 minutes before even sipping. Attempting to drink before it had cooled down always resulted in a minor burn on my toungue, the roof of my mouth, and/or a scalded feeling in my upper throat. On the occasions when I actually ate there, I mostly couldn't even start the cofee until I had finished the entire meal it was supposed to go with. Adding cold 'cream' didn't seem to help much.

That is too hot. I don't care what temp ranges you define; when I can drink coffee from pretty much anywhere in the world (well, OK, just North America and Europe) right away yet I have to wait 10+ minutes for McD's coffee to cool before I can drink it, McD's was serving it too hot.

BTW, you may have noticed my past-tense with reference to visiting McDonalds. I have not purchased anything from there since 2001. They've never been a favorite, but the food seemed to be slipping in quality and, as a final straw, I had three errors on a single order (short-changed, undercooked beef, and regular cola when I ordered diet). After that, I wrote them off as hopeless.

Now, regarding the case, the woman did not take proper precautions WRT proper care and handling of a hot beverage. However, the beverage itself was served hotter than industry norms. Both parties should share the blame, but I'd say McD's has a higher degree of responsibility as it could be argued their product was faulty and that the results of her inadequate precautions would not have been nearly as severe if the coffee had been at a more normal temperature..

You know, come to think of it, you are pretty much on the money. The only coffee I get hotter then that is when I take a coffee mug, heat it with near 200 degree F water, then make espresso, where the water is turned to steam, and forced through the coffee and recondensed. Even espresso, going into the pyrex I use to collect it, looses more heat then Macs coffee has in those cheap cups.

Now you make me want to take a real good look at what kind of coffee system they use, and the company that makes it...

s
 

Fushigi

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
2,890
Location
Illinois, USA
Tannin said:
You can't get water hotter than 100 degrees. It is that simple.
While in a liquid state and under 1 atmosphere of pressure, this is correct. But how hot water can get doesn't really matter at all. What matters is the appropriate serving temperature for a substance that is going to be consumed by a human being.

At what temperature does the human tongue, the lining of the mouth, and the throat burn or otherwise take damage? At what temperature does skin, since the case in question was a spill and not a consumption, burn or take on burn-like symptoms?
 

Buck

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Messages
4,514
Location
Blurry.
Website
www.hlmcompany.com
What matters is the reasonableness of both parties. It's common sense that a hot drink contains hot liquids that are potentially dangerous. If I'm going to serve a hot drink, I'll take reasonable safety precautions, just like the consumer should take reasonable precautions when handling the product.
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,448
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Second point first. Slightly less than 100 degrees. In the case of orally ingested liquids, rather closer to 100 than you might imagine. This is for four reasons:

(a) you get used to it through drinking tea, coffee, and hot soup, and eating steaks still sizzling off the grill. (Try ticking your finger in your coffee - it's bloody hot!)
(b) you reduce the temperature by sipping, as opposed to drinking it straight down the way you might scull a glass of beer. When sipping, you typically inhale in such a way as to extrude a long, thin "finger" of liquid which, being thin, cools fairly quickly, and you also suck cool air at the same time: the draft of air you suck in as you sip cools the liquid quite a lot.
(c) the liquid forms a bolus; a more-or-less ball-shaped form that is cooler on the outside (see a and b above) than it is on the inside. The hottest inner part of the bolus doesn't contact skin right away, and has had time to cool a fracton by the time it does.
(d) The mouth is already coated in slightly sticky liquid (spit). This presumably also serves an insulating function, and no doubt helps conduct the heat away to a larger surface area.

Point (b) is a key point: it is this sipping process that makes a good cup of tea (or coffee, or even scotch) "taste" as good as it does. What you are really doing is more like "smelling" the tea than tasting it: you are picking up all sorts of subtle flavour delights from the aroma of the air you suck in as you sip your tea. It works much, much better when it's hot. This is why so many people hate cold tea/coffee - it doesn't have anything like the same "flavour". (Actually aroma, but we call it flavour.) It works with scotch (I assume) because the alcohol in the scotch is volatile and thus serves the same function that the heat in the tea/coffee does: transferring flavours into the air around the liquid as you sip.

(I'll get to my other point in another post.)
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,448
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Fushigi said:
But how hot water can get doesn't really matter at all. What matters is the appropriate serving temperature for a substance that is going to be consumed by a human being.

This would be logical, Fushigi, if and only if typical people in ordinary life didn't routinely serve hot drinks at a temperature very close to 100 degrees. We already know how the ordinary person makes coffee: heat the water to exactly 100 degrees (i.e., boil the kettle), pour, and serve. That is done in countles millions of homes and offices around the world every single day.

The only factors that come into play are:
* if you take milk or not
* if you take sugar (the metal spoon must drop the temperature quite a bit)
* how cold your cup is
* how much thermal inertia your cup has
* how efficiently your cup insulates against cooling
* air temperature and time - the colder the room the faster it cools
* altitude and air pressure effects (make boiling point very slightly higher or lower)

This brings me to Tea's point that Santilli picked up on and Tea forgot to mention: microwave heating.

Now I forget the exact details, and I'm too lazy to look them up. but when you boil water, unless you heat the thing incredibly rapidly with something like an explosion, it doesn't all boil at the same time. Why not? Didn't Tea claim that it is all at the same temperature?

Yup. But actually it's a bit more complicated than that. When the kettle first starts getting hot, you can hear it 'singing". Lots of steam bubbles are forming, and then starting to rise, but cooling through contact with as-yet still liquid water, and condensing again, each one with a tiny "pop" sound. These bubbles are in fact a little bit hotter than the water surrounding them - just hot enough to vaporise.

But when the water is nearly boiling, the kettle stops singing! Why? Shouldn't it sing louder when it's at 99 degress than it does at 94 degrees? You'd think so. But we know it doesn't, because it goes suddenly quiet just a few seconds before it boils. And the reason, it turns out, is that as it approaches 100 degrees, the activity in the kettle increases; more and more little steam bubbles form and pop out, and al this activity stirs the water up and mixes it very effectively - so effectively that all the water is at just about exactly the same temperature, not just approximately the same temperature. There are no cold spots, and equally there are no extra-hot spots: none of the water is a little bit over 100 degrees, so the bubbles stop forming and the kettle stops singing.

But only for a moment, of course. The element adds a bit more heat, and all of a sudden it's boiling over.

Ahh, Bartender. Since you are here, I wonder if you would mind organising me a small scotch. Just a little one, and then I'll go to bed.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,278
This is a drive through problem. If you anticipate serving coffee in such a manner, you should provide a proper container, and anticipate that people are going to spill the coffee. If that's the case, then the coffee should not be served at boiling, or very near it, first since coffee is NOT supposed to be boiled, and second, it's clearly a possibility that the person is going to spill coffee in a moving car. Also, when you have the first 650 cases of injury, one might consider a slight drop in temperature might be a good idea, or an upgrade in cup quality, etc.

I think this suit went through because Macs was aware of the problem, had it brought to them in a reasonable fashion, and refused to change anything to remedy the problem. Many businesses are so completely uncaring, as we all know. The funny part is, from my last experience, I don't think the Pacifica Macs has changed ANYTHING.

The only difference is, thanks to all the publicity, I treat Macs coffee with a respect I don't other coffees I buy. I make sure I have a high quality container, take plenty of cream, and make sure when I drink it, the car is stopped. I'm also very much aware that the flimsy cup they give, unlike say Starbucks, that comes with a wrap for the cup, so when it gets hot, you have another layer of insulation.

The lawsuit was a good thing if for no other reason to make all aware that
Macs coffee is much hotter, and you have to take precautions to deal with, and extra care. Too bad Macs can't take the same precautions in serving the product...

s
 

Buck

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Messages
4,514
Location
Blurry.
Website
www.hlmcompany.com
Santilli,

If anyone were to serve an unusually hot beverage in an inadequate drink vessel, I would certainly find that unreasonable. However, since I (nor do I allow any of my passengers) do not drink or eat in my car, it is a moot point for me. But, for countless millions in this country, it is probably very important, and basic precautions should be taken.

PS: Personally, the cup and sleeve from Starbucks becomes a bit thin with freshly poured hot water for a cup of tea. I usually ask for an additional cup of ice to help cool it down.
 

Bartender

Storage is cool
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Messages
736
Location
Behind the Bar
Website
www.mittelsmann.net
Santilli said:
...first since coffee is NOT supposed to be boiled...

Indeed, it should be brewed with 93-degree Celsius water. Any cooler, and some of the aromatics that make up the flavor will not be released. Hotter, and some undesirable elements will be pulled from the grounds, affecting the taste.
 

Tea

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,749
Location
27a No Fixed Address, Oz.
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Tannin, you forgot about the microwave thing.

Here is a little experiment you can do at home. (Carefully!) Take a large, clean coffee cup. Select one with a nice smooth, glossy lining (none of your rustic stoneware crockery here, something with a smooth finish on the inside and no rough edges or corners).

Fill it up with clean water (any temperature below boiling - cold will do) and microwave it. DON'T use a microwave with a turrntable. It has to sit still. You will have to experiment a bit to find out how long to cook it for, but you are aiming to microwave it on high for as long as you possibly can without making it boil all over the place.

Once you have wiped up all the water that spat itself all over the microwave when you took it just a little bit too far and worked out that with your tap water and your microwave in cup X filled to point Y it takes Z seconds to boil it all over the shop, start again and give it Z-5 seconds.

You now have water at maybe 98 or 99 degrees, right? Nope. It's well over that.

Here is how you test. (Carefully! You can scald youself quite easily doing this.) Take the cup out of the micowave. Add something to it. Anything you like: a few drops of cold water, some sugar, a few grains of sand, an spoon - it doesn't matter what you add.

All of a sudden, the thing boils over like crazy!

After you have explained to your wife why there is water all over the kitchen floor and wrapped a handkerchief around your scaled hand, you can start trying to figure out what happened.

Any takers? I'm going to find a tree and put my head down .... no .. there is going to be a frost. I think I'll sleep human-style tonight.

In a bed

With blankets.

PS: Tannin mumbled something about "that was delightful, I've never had Lismore before, tell the Bartender thankyoufrommeandnowI'mreallysleepygoodnighteveryone".
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
Before we go any further, Tea's home experiment is an incredibly foolish thing to advocate, and I hope no-one here is gullible enough to try it.

Never mind scalds to the hand - you're looking at a potential explosion and therefore your face is at risk. This neat little article explains the basics, such as:

If one litre of water is superheated by only 1 °C (ie if it is heated to 101 °C without boiling), it is in an unstable state, and it can suddenly produce about 3 litres of steam. The rapid production of a substantial quantity of steam within the bulk of the water will cause it to boil vigorously and possibly to appear to explode. The result is boiling water flying at speed out of the container.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,278
Well, the MW's superheat the liquid, past boiling, by increasing the vibration of the molecules, without disturbing them, unlike an external heat source.

When you try and remove it, this changes the position of the molecules, and the molecules are free to vibrate into air, and escape.

IIRC, Macs was using MWave ovens to heat coffee in certain stores, as well.

s
 

Fushigi

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
2,890
Location
Illinois, USA
Bartender said:
Santilli said:
...first since coffee is NOT supposed to be boiled...

Indeed, it should be brewed with 93-degree Celsius water.
The temp at which coffee or any beverage is brewed is unrelated to the whole discussion. What matters is the temp at which the beverage is served. McD's has a history of serving coffee at a temperature markedly higher than pretty much everyone else. That higher temp, be it from microwaving (I've not seen that done in a restaraunt but wouldn't doubt that it could be) or other means is the central issue. The served product is too hot to consume right away and is hot enough to cause burns if accidentally spilled.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
Secondly, Tannin's claim that "You can't get water hotter than 100 degrees. It is that simple." is nonsense. To quote from the superheating article, "in the absence of bubbles, water can be heated above 100 °C". Although more likely in microwave ovens, it happens in saucepans too. Santilli has also pointed out that pressurization is a common catering technique that allows water to be heated well past 100°C.

Tea's little lecture about water's chemical properties is riddled with errors. The 0 and 100 points on the Celsius scale relate to pure water at 1 atmosphere. Change either, and the points vary widely. For example, adding salt to water both lowers the freezing point and raises the boiling point. You can't just "ignore some assorted impurities".

Tea said:
If you change the temperature of water (with or without the tasty impurities) beyond those two end points (0 and 100), it isn't water anymore. It's either steam or ice.
...
One of the things that makes water interesting is that, so long as it's in some sort of motion, it is pretty much the same temperature all the way through.
No, no, no. Have you never heard of temperature stratification in liquids? How do you explain temperature variations in the ocean, even in waves at the beach? Once you realize that temperature does vary, you can see that water can exist in more than one phase at a time.

BTW, steam is water vapour, and what you see is not water vapour, but mist, i.e. condensed water - the liquid phase.
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
Bartender said:
Santilli said:
...first since coffee is NOT supposed to be boiled...

Indeed, it should be brewed with 93-degree Celsius water. Any cooler, and some of the aromatics that make up the flavor will not be released. Hotter, and some undesirable elements will be pulled from the grounds, affecting the taste.

I can't keep up with this. :(

Santilli, who worked in the restaurant trade for 20 years, is of course correct. The Bartender needs to recheck his sources. 93C would be appropriate for black tea, but not much else. There's a commercial incentive to brew at the hottest possible temperature, but it doesn't produce the best coffee.

And I forgot to point out yet another fallacious claim by Tea: water from a kettle will not pour at 100C. As soon as it switches off, the boiling slows - anyone can oberve this. By her own definition, if it ain't boiling merrily, it ain't at 100C. :p
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
Finally, there's Tea's drink serving temperature guidelines.

A proper cold drink is served at between just barely above zero through to about 5 degrees
No, barely above zero would be an 'ice-cold' drink. Cold drinks such as white wine are often served at 10C.

Then there are luke-warm drinks. Nobody likes those much (except maybe for warm milk when you are younger than me ...) but they are served a little above blood temperature: in the 40 to 50 degree range.
Human breast milk is about 30C. Skin temperature varies widely, but averages 33C. Anything above that will feel warm.

A hot beverage becomes drinkable for most people between 50C and 60C. Much above 60C (140F), you'll burn your mouth. The thing is, you may not realize you are doing so (a point I made earlier).

Tannin's tea drinking tips are creative, but mostly the product of a fevered imagination. For instance, what about your lips? Unless you drool a lot, they're not covered by magical moisture-repellant saliva, and I'm fairly sure that even a long, thin "finger" of liquid has to cross them.

Sipping an 85C drink to check how hot it is would burn those lips, no question.

I think the bottom line is that Tannin and Tea have pulled a lot of stuff out of their collective ass. How about some research instead?
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
Here's a description of water at various temperatures, from a tea brewing guide:

60°C - Slightest sign of bubbles and steam; water not too hot to touch
70°C - Small bubbles developed, slow steam starts to rise
90°C - Full bubbles developed, brisk steam rising
95°C - Roaring boil
 

time

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 18, 2002
Messages
4,932
Location
Brisbane, Oz
Here's the best account I've found, compiled from the WSJ and Newsweek:

On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, her son Jim and her grandson Chris Tiano left Santa Fe at dawn to drive to the Albuquerque airport to drop off Jim for an early flight. Stella, 79 years old but "quite spry," had just retired from a long career as a department store sales clerk. After leaving the airport, Stella and Chris, who was driving, stopped at a McDonald's drive-up window for breakfast. After they had received their food, Chris pulled over and parked the car so Stella could add some cream and sugar to her coffee. She looked for a place to set the coffee cup down, but there was no cup-holder in the Ford Probe and the dashboard was slanted. Since both hands were needed to remove the lid and add the cream and sugar, she placed the coffee cup between her knees to keep it secure while she removed the lid. While she was attempting to remove the lid, the coffee spilled into her lap.

She screamed as the scalding coffee soaked into and through her sweat suit and scorched her skin. Chris leaped from the car to help. She yanked at her sweat suit and squirmed in the bucket seat, in excruciating pain. Chris raced her to the emergency room, but by the time they arrived severe third-degree burns had spread across her inner thighs, buttocks, groin and labia. Third-degree burns are "full thickness" skin burns that char and blacken the skin and permanently destroy the skin and nerves. Stella remained in the hospital for seven days, went to her daughter's house for three weeks to recuperate, and then returned to the hospital for skin grafts. The grafts were almost as painful as the burns, her daughter said. "She was in tremendous pain; I didn't know if she'd survive this." She had lost 20 pounds, which brought her weight down to only 83 pounds, and was practically immobilized. She was disabled for two years and has permanent scars over 16 percent of her body.

Stella had never initiated a lawsuit and was not looking to initiate one now. However, she and her family thought McDonald's should pay $15,000 to $20,000 to cover her daughter's out-of-pocket expenses (which were about $2000) and wages lost while staying home to take care of her and to reimburse Medicare for over $10,000 of medical expenses. About six months after the accident, Stella's daughter wrote to McDonald's to request reimbursement for these items and to ask that McDonald's lower the temperature of its coffee. Although McDonald's had previously settled many claims by other coffee burn victims for amounts up to and exceeding $500,000, it offered Stella and her family only $800.

While she had been recuperating in her daughter's house, Stella had met a Santa Fe couple who had formerly lived in Texas. The couple knew a Houston attorney, Reed Morgan, who had litigated a coffee-burn lawsuit against McDonald's in 1986 on behalf of a woman in Houston who had also suffered third-degree burns. In that case, Mr. Morgan had had a survey taken of coffee temperatures at 20 McDonald's restaurants and 18 other fast-food restaurants such as Dairy Queen, Dunkin' Donuts and Wendy's. Nine of the 12 highest readings were from McDonald's restaurants. Mr. Morgan also deposed Christopher Appleton, a quality-assurance manager at McDonald's headquarters, who said "he was aware of this risk . . . and had no plans to turn down the heat." McDonald's settled the Texas case for $27,500.

Having had her request for minimal compensation rebuffed by McDonald's, Stella and her family contacted Morgan to have him file a lawsuit against McDonald's for her medical expenses and pain and suffering. Morgan had a survey taken of coffee temperatures at numerous fast-food restaurants around Albuquerque, which indicated that other restaurants all served their coffee at least 20 degrees lower than the approximately 180 degrees at which McDonald's served its coffee. He also obtained McDonald's operating and training manual, which requires its coffee to be brewed at 195 to 205 degrees and held at 180 to 190 degrees for optimal taste.

Morgan offered to settle the case for $300,000, and said later he would have taken half that, but McDonald's did not want to settle. A court-appointed pre-trial mediator, a former judge, recommended that McDonald's settle for $225,000 and said that a jury would be likely to award that amount. McDonald's lawyer did not show up for the mediation, and McDonald's rejected the mediator's recommendation.

Before the trial began, the jurors' thoughts about the case were pretty much the same as those the media and public subsequently had after the verdict became known. The jury foreman, Jerry Goens, said he "wasn't convinced as to why I needed to be there to settle a coffee spill." Juror Roxanne Bell said "I was just insulted. The whole thing sounded ridiculous to me." Juror Betsy Farnham said she also had thought that the suit was frivolous.

But that was before they saw the gruesome photographs of Stella's charred skin, learned of her seven days in the hospital and the subsequent skin grafts, and heard testimony from Dr. Charles Baxter, a renowned burn expert from Southwestern Medical School in Dallas, that coffee at 170 degrees would cause second-degree burns within 3.5 seconds of hitting the skin. Juror Jack Elliott went home and told his wife and daughters "don't drink coffee in the car, at least not hot."

The jury was informed that McDonald's operations and training manual required its coffee to be brewed at 195 to 205 degrees and held at 180 to 190 degrees for optimal taste, and that this was 40 to 50 degrees hotter than coffee made at home. A McDonald's expert argued that any coffee hotter than 130 degrees could produce third-degree burns, so it did not matter that McDonald's coffee was hotter. But a plaintiff's expert testified that lowering the serving temperature to about 160 degrees could make a big difference, because it takes less than three seconds to produce a third-degree burn at 190 degrees, about 12 to 15 seconds at 180 degrees, and about 20 seconds at 160 degrees. According to Stella's son-in-law, McDonald's experts "admitted the[coffee] was too hot for consumption when sold. They did not contest the fact that it took 25 minutes to cool to a drinkable temperature."

Morgan wanted to introduce photographs of the third-degree burns caused by McDonald's coffee that had been suffered by his previous Houston client, as well as photographs of a California woman's second- and third-degree burns that occurred in 1990 when a McDonald's employee spilled hot coffee into her car (the latter case was settled for $230,000). McDonald's lawyer, Tracy McGee, objected: "First-person accounts by sundry women whose nether regions have been scorched by McDonald's coffee might well be worthy of Oprah," she wrote in a motion to the judge, "ut they have no place in a court of law." The judge excluded the photographs and the injured women's testimony, but allowed Morgan to mention the cases.

The jury was further surprised to learn that during the prior ten years McDonald's had received more than 700 reports of coffee burns ranging from mild to third-degree, and had settled burn claims for amounts up to and exceeding $500,000. (Although it is not clear whether it was part of the trial record, the Shriners Burn Institute had complained to the fast-food industry about the serious scalding injuries caused by super-heated coffee.) Christopher Appleton, the McDonald's quality-assurance manager who previously had been deposed in the Texas case, testified that despite the complaints and despite knowing that its coffee was causing serious burns when spilled, McDonald's had not consulted burn experts and had no plans to change any of its coffee policies or procedures. "There are more serious dangers in restaurants," he said. He noted that McDonald's consumer surveys indicated that people like their coffee very hot. He acknowledged that most people would not realize that severe burns were possible with coffee that hot, but stated that McDonald's had decided not to warn its customers about this possibility. (McDonald's had a tiny Caution: Contents Hot label on its cups, which did not impress juror Betty Farnham, who said that she needed her glasses to read it.)

McDonald's safety consultant, Robert Knaff, a human-factors engineer, asserted that 700 complaints, which was about one for every 24 million cups of McDonald's coffee sold, was "basically trivially different from zero." He also misspoke: "It's just that a burn is a very trivial thing - [I mean] a burn is a very terrible thing."

By this time the jurors' views of the case had shifted radically. "Each statistic is somebody badly burned," said juror Betty Farnham. "That [dismissing them as statistically insignificant] really made me angry. There was a person behind every number and I don't think [McDonald's] was attaching enough importance to that." Juror Jack Elliott said he began to realize that the case was about "callous disregard for the safety of the people."

In her closing argument, McGee, the defense lawyer, acknowledged that McDonald's coffee was hot, but argued that was how customers wanted it. She insisted that Stella had only herself to blame. She should not have put the cup between her knees. She should have leapt out of the bucket seat immediately after the spill and removed her clothes. She also argued that the injury was so severe due to Stella's age, since older skin is thinner and thus more vulnerable to injury. "The real question," McGee concluded, ". . . is how far you want our society to go to restrict what most of us enjoy and accept."

The jury took only four hours to reach its verdict. "The facts were so overwhelmingly against the company," said Betty Farnham. "They were not taking care of their consumers." Farnham, who had started the case thinking the suit was frivolous, pushed for a total award of $9.6 million. The jury fixed Stella's actual damages for medical bills and pain and suffering at $200,000, which it reduced to $160,000 after determining that she was contributorily negligent and bore 20% of the overall responsibility for her injury. It also found that McDonald's had engaged in willful, wanton, reckless or malicious conduct, as required for an award of punitive damages. Adopting Morgan's suggestion that punitive damages be assessed equal to one or two days' worth of McDonald's coffee sales, which Morgan estimated to be $1.35 million per day, the jury awarded Stella $2.7 million in punitive damages. "It was our way of saying, 'Hey, open your eyes. People are getting burned'," juror Bell said later.

The trial judge, who, like the Liebecks, was a self-described conservative Republican, agreed with the liability finding, but a month after the verdict he reduced the punitive damages to $480,000 - three times the compensatory damages. He too wanted to let McDonald's know that it "was appropriate to punish and deter" its corporate coffee policy. "This was not a runaway [jury]," he told Newsweek, "I was there." After some additional post-trial maneuvering, the parties settled the case for an undisclosed lesser amount.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,278
Corporate stupidity. Someone probably took a survey of coffee drinkers, and the majority said they like "hot" coffee. Some idiot figured that if 'Hot" is good, scaliding is better. :roll: :roll: :excl:

From that, corporate offices probably bought coffee makers, and holders, and microwaves, and issued the directive listed above, giving target temps, etc.

The said part of all this is that if the coffee takes 25 minutes to cool in their cup, how can anyone hold the cup? I mean they use cheap, cardboard cups that become too hot to hold VERY quickly, and, I'm talking about this having just bought coffee from them on Friday. Amazing that they just don't GET IT.
Even with this law suit, their product is not noticeably cooler then prior...

The coffee doesn't even taste that good, since I think it's at that level when made when you get a bit too much acid, and not enough body...
But, after surfing, it is hot...
s
:wink:
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,278
By the way, the holders usually combine a big brewing area, a basket with the coffee in it, and a sprinkler to distribute water. Once brewed, the liquid sits over heat, and a heavy lid is on top of the machine. For the steam to escape, the pressure has to be sufficent to lift the heavy stainless top, since no other openings are present.

That's one kind of coffee holder. Macs uses a small box system, that appears to be designed as a self contained steel box, and you put it over a heating system, which keeps the coffee very hot, and, minimizes oxidation. In other words, invision a closed steel container, opened only by the spigot, with a vacum above, caused only by some coffee being extracted. In other words, the initial container is filled full, with no room for air, put over heat, and kept very hot. In the last scenario, how hot could the coffee get before boiling???

s
:eekers:
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,926
Location
USA
I read the post, and I do feel bad for the lady, but come on...could she not feel the heat through the cup? Did she not realize that if the coffee by-chance spilled while trying to take off the lid in between your thighs that it might hurt? I still don't feel this should have been a law suite. Now, if McDonald's cups were faulty, and would break open releasing the contents of hot coffee, then sure...that might be grounds for some compensation.

I see very little difference between this case, and a case where you brew your own coffee at home and spill it in your crotch. Does that mean if you brew it at home, you can sue Mr. Coffee?

Last I knew, McDonald's does not microwave their coffee. It's brewed like normal coffee. McDonald's was my first place of employment when I turned 16. Not a proud moment, but I don't regret working there.
 

i

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Feb 10, 2002
Messages
1,080
I have to say I've never come across a drink hotter than McDonald's coffee. And in general, only rarely do I come across food that makes people more irritable than the majority of stuff you find at Rotten Ronald's. Any worse than that and we're bordering on illness.

A side note to myself:

If you would prefer another option -- rather than the one we discussed earlier -- then I'm afraid you're out of luck.

You see, I have already dyed the orangutan blue.

At first I rebuffed the idea, but then, after having thought about it for quite some time, I realized that it was too good an opportunity to pass by. Other than the possibility of a brief jail sentence, I don't foresee any problems. Honestly though, I don't think jail is likely. It will be clear to anyone that this orangutan is more attractive now than it was before.

Of course, if you disagree, then you're free to argue. But if you really don't like the result, rather than dwell on it, you can always provide an alternate color. Perhaps a nice shade of green?

But in a final defense of my choice, please remember that the only thing better than, hotter than, higher than, greater than, cleaner than, and more spectacular than a blue orangutan ... is an orangutan with a good command of the English language.
 

Tea

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,749
Location
27a No Fixed Address, Oz.
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Time, your posts are both accurate and to the point. Unfortunately, where they are accurate they are not to the point, and where they are to the point they are not accurate.

Your microwave scaremongering is graphic, but merely repeats exactly what I already said in my original post.

10C ain't cold, it's room temperature. You've been living in Queensland too long. (Right here and now, 10C is warmer than room temperature.)

Tea is brewed at boiling point. Always. If you don't boil the water, you don't get the flavour. (There are some other types of tea, quite uncommon in the west, that are not infused in the ordinary way.)

Damn! I'm out of time. More demolition of more silly stuff from the Banana State when I finish work. Great thread though.
 

Santilli

Hairy Aussie
Joined
Jan 27, 2002
Messages
5,278
I guess it depends on which Macs you go to. The one in Fremont was using styrfoam cups, and Bloomfield coffee makers, that don't keep coffee under pressure.

Keep in mind, that same Macs, about 4 months ago, had a pressure coffee system, as I described above.

Also, the one in Pacifica has different cups, and much hotter coffee.

The economics of pain....

s
 

e_dawg

Storage Freak
Joined
Jul 19, 2002
Messages
1,903
Location
Toronto-ish, Canada
Tea said:
Tea is brewed at boiling point. Always. If you don't boil the water, you don't get the flavour. (There are some other types of tea, quite uncommon in the west, that are not infused in the ordinary way.)

Don't agree with that... Let's look at two typical tea making scenarios at home:

1. The immediate pour into the tea cup or tea pot, straight from the kettle as soon as the water has boiled method. When the water comes out of the kettle, it is already below 95 C if you pour it shortly after the heat input is removed. Unless the water is STILL at a roaring boil AFTER it's been poured into the tea cup/pot, it ain't at 100 C while brewing. I'd put the brewing temperature in the low 90's in this situation.

2. The I'll pour the water into the tea cup or pot when I'm ready method. It drops rapidly to 85-90 C if you wait a bit before you pour it -- as it would be if you had an electric kettle like most N. American households. When the water reaches boiling, most electric kettles automatically shut off. Most people don't come running over; they return to the kettle after they finish up whatever it is they were doing. Figure about 85 C at this point, then after pouring it into a coffee mug or tea cup, the brewing starts at about 80 C.

The ideal temperature range for brewing tea, from various sources on the internet, appears to be ~80-95 C. ~95 C for black teas, and ~80 C for green teas. So the "no wait" method is best for brewing the more common black teas.

Now, as for what temperature you should serve tea at, let's first talk about how hot you can possibly serve it in the first place. If you follow method #1 above, the hottest you could possibly serve it is in the low 90's. If you take sugar with your tea and use a spoon to stir it, we have to be at or below 90 by now. If you want milk too, there is no way the tea is above 80 C.

As for what temperature your mouth burns at, it depends on how used to drinking very hot liquids you are. Veteran coffee/tea drinkers who drink it as hot as possible (as our simian friend) can handle liquids in the 70's no problem. Mere mortals hit their limit in the 60's.
 

Tea

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,749
Location
27a No Fixed Address, Oz.
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Yes, and no, Doggy One.

I'll take the no first. Tea drinkers always pour from a boiling kettle, starting from within a few seconds of the electrical cut-out. If you've let it go for a while while you finished doing something, you flick the switch back on to bring it back up to 100 degrees while you fetch the cups and stuff. Everybody does this. Everybody that's a tea drinker, anyway.

(I am prepared to consider favourably the proposition that there aren't any tea drinkers in or near the United States, by the way. Not real ones, at any rate. Why else would so many Americans drink that horrible coffee muck?)

(OK, OK. Coffee isn't muck. I actually like coffee quite a lot, especially a really hot, fairly weak, long black, but Tannin won't let me drink it because he thinks it makes me too hyperactive. I also like Greek coffee and cappachin ... capechen ... capichino ... milky coffee with bubbles in it, but I'm not allowed to have those either.)

Now, back to temperatures. Yup, I'll accept 95 degrees as a reasonable estimate of the temperature the water is when it hits the tea in the cup or pot. It starts at 100 (or very close to it), pouring must reduce that by something like 5 to 10 degrees. Note, however, that the best tea (and you can taste the difference easily) is made with water as hot as possible. This is because, unlike coffee, tea is an infusion: the flavour is not released by cold water. Coffee, being a suspension, is just a matter of mixing up the granules in the right proportions. (That's instant coffee. I'll defer to real coffee drinkers about the brewed sort.)

I am, by the way, an expert on tea. It's my middle ... er .. it's my first na .... no it's my last .... um ... it's my name.
 

Fushigi

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
2,890
Location
Illinois, USA
I'll say it again:
Fushigi said:
The temp at which coffee or any beverage is brewed is unrelated to the whole discussion. What matters is the temp at which the beverage is served.
 

Tea

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,749
Location
27a No Fixed Address, Oz.
Website
www.redhill.net.au
You can say it as many times as you like, Fushigi, and it will remain as pointless a comment as it was the first time you made it: hot drinks are normally served immediately.

What are you telling me you do? Go to the kitchen to make a guest a cup of coffee, then stand around looking at the fridge magnets for ten minutes while you wait for it to reach perfect drinking temperature, then hand it to them?

Of course not. You boil the kettle (~100 degrees), pour the coffee (~90 to 95 degrees), hand it to your guest (~85 to 90 degrees). Then you both sit down and talk for a while while the drink reaches the ideal drinking temperature.

Or you make a cup of tea for yourself. Same deal. You boil the kettle (~100 degrees), pour the tea (~90 to 95 degrees), carry it over to your desk, and plonk it there until such time as you surface from whatever task was occupying your mind and remember to drink it. (In Tannin's case, this usually results in him drinking it stone cold 45 minutes later. He's very forgetful.)

The temperature a hot drink is brewed at, in other words, is the temperature it is served at. Always. (Bar whatever cooling takes place in the 5 seconds it takes you to pass the cup over: 0.1 degrees maybe.) (Also except in very bad food joints where the service is so slow that it goes cold while the waitress serves 17 other people and answers the telephone.)
 

Bozo

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 12, 2002
Messages
4,396
Location
Twilight Zone
When I make tea, I put a few tea bags in the coffe pot where the coffee usually goes. Then add water and press the start button. The water is brought to boiling and dripped through the tea bags.

Serving temperature is somewhat less than boiling. Although I usually poor it over ice for iced tea. (it's above 90F here)

Question. In Oz it is winter now, right? Do you get snow?

Bozo :mrgrn:
 

Tannin

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
4,448
Location
Huon Valley, Tasmania
Website
www.redhill.net.au
I am not!

(Not what?)

I don't know. I'm just not.

(You're not?)

No. Not at all.

(Are you sure?)

Quite sure. Not in the slightest, you silly ape.

(Not in the slightest what?)

I can't remember.
 

Tea

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
3,749
Location
27a No Fixed Address, Oz.
Website
www.redhill.net.au
Snow Bozo? Not usually, not unless you're above about 3000 feet.

Ballarat, regarded as one of the coldest non-alpine places in Australia, is about 1000 feet above sea level. Apart from making the kettle boil at 99 degrees instead of 100 (by my rough calculation), it also lets us in for snow sometimes. I suppose you get flakes of snow in the air two or three times in the average year, and it will last long enough to settle on the ground an inch or two or even three thick maybe every third or fourth year. Something like that.

Very little of Australia is much above 2000 feet high: the continent is incredibly old and it is basically just worn flat, all except for a bit of a long, narrow fringe all the way down the east coast (relatively young mountains thrust upwards about 50 or 60 million years ago by rifting between the Australian and New Zealand plates, if I rememember correctly).

The Great Dividing Range, as it is called, is quite narrow, and rarely gets above two or three thousand feet. There are several peaks around the 5000 foot mark scattered along it, and a fairly extensive area on the Victoria - New South Wales border that is more or less that high all over, with peaks up to 7000 feet.

But that's it. (Outside Tasmania, which also has mountains, plenty of them and up to 5000 feet or so, but which tends to be quite mild in winter despite being further south - it's surrounded by sea, and that keeps it cool in summer, warm in winter.)

We would have quite regular snow, in other words, if almost the entire country wasn't so low-lying.

You probably think of Australia as being a long way south, sort of balancing the position of Europe and North America. I know I tend to do that, even though I know it's not so. Ballarat (in southern Victoria, the southern-most mainland state) is somewhere around the 37th parallel - i.e., about as far from the equator as San Francisco, or Washington, or the northernmost coast of North Africa.

We have a huge problem here in that we have only a very small amount of alpine country, and it contains a great variety of plants and animals that can live nowhere else (the rest of the continent is too hot and dry for them now). Global warming is already having a major impact on these areas, but there is nothing we can do about it, except pray that the major greenhouse gas producers in the world (primarily the United States) get their act together before it's too late, if it isn't already too late.

Anyway, on the one hand we have low-lying landforms that tend to produce higher temperatures than you'd otherwise expect. But on the other hand, we are a long way further north than most people realise. And on the other, other hand, the southern hemisphere is, on average, quite a lot colder than the northern hemisphere, roughly 10 degrees colder at or near the pole.

How cold does it get in winter in San Francisco or the southern-most Greek islands? I know Washington gets bloody cold sometimes, but then the continental USA has weird weather patterns because of the funnel effect of the two great mountain ranges running down either coast (real mountains, not the tired little worn-down pimples we have). The cold Arctic air gets directed further south than would otherwise be the case because it gets trapped between the Rockies and the other ones on the other side that I dare not spell - Applesomethingorother.
 

Buck

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Messages
4,514
Location
Blurry.
Website
www.hlmcompany.com
Tea said:
(I am prepared to consider favourably the proposition that there aren't any tea drinkers in or near the United States, by the way. Not real ones, at any rate.)

Typical ape, using generalities like 'any tea drinkers...not real ones at any rate'. Granted it is not as wide spread as one sees in the British Empire, but there are true tea drinkers just the same.

PS: Once the kettle switches off, the water immediately stops bubbling, isn't that a sign of water dropping below 100C?

PPS: Have you bothered calculating the heat of loose leaf tea brewing in a pot for a few minutes, even with a tea cozy?
 

mubs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
4,908
Location
Somewhere in time.
Buck said:
Typical ape, using generalities like 'any tea drinkers...not real ones at any rate'.
Seconded.

My wife is an avid tea drinker, and so is her family (my family and I are coffee drinkers). She makes it the Indian way - chai - milk, tea and water all boiled together, strained, and drunk. Sometimes the sugar is added to the boiling stuff, sometimes later to the cup.

She's one of those odd people who likes coffee in the morning, and tea in the afternoon. Usually people stick with one or the other. Like people who are dog lovers, or cat lovers. People that like both cats and dogs (like me) are a small minority.
 
Top