Lawsuit 'Discriminatory' Gluten-Free Menu
Replies
-
This made me chuckle for a couple reasons...
#1 -- since when is Celiacs disease a "disability"
#2 -- Everything advertised as "Gluten Free" is ALWAYS more expensive no matter where you go..
I tried gluten free for a month to see if I were intolerant/gluten sensitive, but that was not the case. And everything I bought was more expensive.0 -
herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.0 -
herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha0 -
terricherry2 wrote: »Maybe people with genetic predispositions to heart disease and high cholesterol should start suing McDonald's for only serving high salt/fat food (don't know about elsewhere but even the salads in the UK have hideous amounts).
Or maybe just eat somewhere else if it bothers you that much.
That is the worst idea ever and also would require there to be some evidence of causation of heart disease from high salt/fat, which if you have some I'd love to see it
Sarcasm my dear.
But oh hi *waves*
0 -
Seeing the news about this lawsuit made me think "no hope for humanity"
Seeing the comments on PF Chang's facebook page from all the people with celiac who are letting them know they enjoy their restaurant and are grateful that they even have a gluten free menu to choose from and hope the lawsuit gets thrown out etc.... Hope for humanity restored
0 -
heh. truth.herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha
I was complaining about Snookie buying a 2.6 M$ home here in NJ and I was like WTF does this woman have this much money. And my coworker said- because she's willing to do stupid things on TV... I was like NOOOOOOO I'm more than willing to do stupid things on TV and get paid for it!!! WHY AM I NOT A MILLIONAIRE YET!!! DMANIT! Plus I'm better looking and funnier! And smarter!!!!!
asd;lkfj;sldkfj0 -
herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
And again, if I go to McDonalds -- or anywhere else for that matter -- and order a HOT coffee I expect it to be just that: HOT. Regardless if it is "super heated" or whatever I want my dang coffee to be HOT because that's how I ordered it. There have been times where I've actually had to have them make me a new coffee because it wasn't HOT. I'm not an idiot. I know that hot things are going to burn me. But I'm also not going to sue when that happens.
Honestly when will the frivolous law suits end? Should I sue the maker of my water heater because the water got too hot and I burned myself? What about the company that made the tea pot that I use at night? The steam from the boiling water hurt my hand when I was pouring it. Should I sue them for not warning me that boiling water produces hot steam?0 -
You never see Canadians out there suing places. I accidentally had boiling hot water spilled on my hand at a coffee shop, had a big scar for years, and I didn't go suing anyone over an accident. Has anyone sued Starbucks over charging more for soy or lactose-free milk too? I stopped ordering lattes after they revoked the free milk surcharge for Starbucks card holders, but I didn't go crying about it.
The coffee case is one of those that is really misunderstood. McDonalds had over 700 cases of burns and held their coffee at a much higher temp then recommended which caused the lady (who was sitting in a non moving vehicle) to get 3rd degree burns over 6% of her body. If the store had held the coffee at the correct temperature no burns woudl have happened. She originally asked for $20k but was awarded more in punitive damages by the jury, although the final amount was greatly reduced. For comparison, Tim Hortons (in Canada) was sued for $2 million (awarded $70K) over hot potato soup burns. (Laflamme c. Groupe TDL ltée, 2014 QCCS 312)
Canada doesn’t get a free pass, there are plenty of bad lawsuits out there all over. Less actaully go to court than you think though, anyone can file, but most are dismissed early on.
Excuse me, but I never made any mention to the McDonald's case you are referring to. In fact, I am someone who advocates for the woman who sued as I have read some excerpts of the court recordings from that particular case. She was an elderly woman, and she had to get skin grafts on her inner thighs. Before she sued, she had only asked for her medical costs to be covered and was denied a settlement.
I am talking about an incident that happened to me. A new staff member at a coffee shop spilled boiling hot water on my hand and I had a scar for years. It was an accident, and it never even occurred to me to sue. That was my point.
Suing for burns is not the same thing as suing for discrimination when there is no real discrimination present. The lawsuit in question is significantly more frivolous.
0 -
herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha
So it is okay for companies to put you in more dangerous situations than asked for? I expect drinks to be hot, I don't expect them to give me 3rd degree burns because you are not supposed to keep them that hot.
0 -
heh. truth.herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha
I was complaining about Snookie buying a 2.6 M$ home here in NJ and I was like WTF does this woman have this much money. And my coworker said- because she's willing to do stupid things on TV... I was like NOOOOOOO I'm more than willing to do stupid things on TV and get paid for it!!! WHY AM I NOT A MILLIONAIRE YET!!! DMANIT! Plus I'm better looking and funnier! And smarter!!!!!
asd;lkfj;sldkfj
You can have her! She used to live in my town
And when Jersey shore came out all I heard in college was "Oh you're from Poughkeepsie? Isn't that where Snookie is from" 0 -
herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha
So it is okay for companies to put you in more dangerous situations than asked for? I expect drinks to be hot, I don't expect them to give me 3rd degree burns because you are not supposed to keep them that hot.
No It's not alright- but certain people will take advantage of a situation and then make a law suit out of nothing(kinda like the link in the OP). It's gotten out of control..0 -
I have to pay extra for petite sized clothes and then pay again to have them tailored because I'm short. Should I sue the clothing industry for discrimination?
Come on, folks. Restaurants are trying to accommodate your dietary needs, and you respond by suing them?0 -
herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha
So it is okay for companies to put you in more dangerous situations than asked for? I expect drinks to be hot, I don't expect them to give me 3rd degree burns because you are not supposed to keep them that hot.
They don't expect you to pour the coffee all over you either.
0 -
#FirstWorldProblems0
-
I can't believe this case will go to court, is it really not getting tossed out by the first judge that sees it? As others said, gluten free ingredients cost more, not only that, even if they don't in this case, they may require some prep time (including equipment cleaning or preparing the food off to the side if the cook is scrupulous) that is worth charging a dollar for.0
-
heh. truth.herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha
I was complaining about Snookie buying a 2.6 M$ home here in NJ and I was like WTF does this woman have this much money. And my coworker said- because she's willing to do stupid things on TV... I was like NOOOOOOO I'm more than willing to do stupid things on TV and get paid for it!!! WHY AM I NOT A MILLIONAIRE YET!!! DMANIT! Plus I'm better looking and funnier! And smarter!!!!!
asd;lkfj;sldkfj
You can have her! She used to live in my town And when Jersey shore came out all I heard in college was "Oh you're from Poughkeepsie? Isn't that where Snookie is from"
I'm in Trenton- I don't want her- I just want to do stupid things and make an *kitten* of myself on TV and get paid- I'm significantly more .... well everything... than she is (well annoying would be a stretch- I think she has that down pat).... so it just makes me crazy that these people are so rich and famous for being stupid.0 -
herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha
So it is okay for companies to put you in more dangerous situations than asked for? I expect drinks to be hot, I don't expect them to give me 3rd degree burns because you are not supposed to keep them that hot.
They don't expect you to pour the coffee all over you either.
It is foreseeable that someone might spill it though, and the courts found the woman 20% responsible and reduced damages accordingly. If McDonalds had done as they were supposed to (remember the kept the water at a dangerously high temperature that they already knew caused burns and was 30-40 degrees higher than industry norm) then there would have been no case because a spilled coffee would not have caused the burns. So there was a bad act on their part and a foreseeable action on the customers. If she had done something weird with the coffee like give herself an enema with it there would have been no case even if it burned her because that is not foreseeable or normal in the course of drinking coffee. Almost everyone has spilled a drink on themselves at some point or another.0 -
Nevermind
0 -
right- so why should you get paid a boat load of money for doing something that everyone does and it's considered something stupid.Almost everyone has spilled a drink on themselves at some point or another.
-
Also- we ALL know- those thin cups- if you squeeze them hard- with no lid- they collapse- and coffee spills out.
IT WAS BETWEEN HER LEGS.
no.sympathy.
I feel like that's an instant- no duh.
0 -
herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
I think you're being deliberately obtuse about this particular incident. Several people have now pointed out that there were circumstances surrounding the case of which the general public is mostly unaware, but you're refusing to acknowledge those points. I love my coffee hot and, to my chagrin, have dumped entire cups of it in my lap by accident (yes, cups...plural. I am a clumsy oaf), but I've never burned 22% of my body, needed skin grafts, an 8-day hospital stay, or 2 years worth of medical care because coffee shouldn't be brewed or stored at 180-190 degrees F. Those temperatures can cause 3rd degree burns in 2 seconds.
I agree with your overall stance on frivolous lawsuits, but the McDonald's Coffee incident was far from frivolous if you spend a minute or two looking at the actual facts.0 -
herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha
So it is okay for companies to put you in more dangerous situations than asked for? I expect drinks to be hot, I don't expect them to give me 3rd degree burns because you are not supposed to keep them that hot.
They don't expect you to pour the coffee all over you either.
It is foreseeable that someone might spill it though, and the courts found the woman 20% responsible and reduced damages accordingly. If McDonalds had done as they were supposed to (remember the kept the water at a dangerously high temperature that they already knew caused burns and was 30-40 degrees higher than industry norm) then there would have been no case because a spilled coffee would not have caused the burns. So there was a bad act on their part and a foreseeable action on the customers. If she had done something weird with the coffee like give herself an enema with it there would have been no case even if it burned her because that is not foreseeable or normal in the course of drinking coffee. Almost everyone has spilled a drink on themselves at some point or another.
So does that mean because I spilled a hot drink on me that I should sue the company? If I spill boiling water from my teapot on myself do I then sue the teapot maker because they didn't warn me that the water will boil and if spilled on myself it can burn me?
I don't care that McDonald's coffee was "hotter than the industry norm". You ordered hot coffee. You are getting hot coffee. Regardless of whether or not you spilled it it is HOT FLIPPING COFFEE! You should know there is the potential to get burned.
0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
I think you're being deliberately obtuse about this particular incident. Several people have now pointed out that there were circumstances surrounding the case of which the general public is mostly unaware, but you're refusing to acknowledge those points. I love my coffee hot and, to my chagrin, have dumped entire cups of it in my lap by accident (yes, cups...plural. I am a clumsy oaf), but I've never burned 22% of my body, needed skin grafts, an 8-day hospital stay, or 2 years worth of medical care because coffee shouldn't be brewed or stored at 180-190 degrees F. Those temperatures can cause 3rd degree burns in 2 seconds.
I agree with your overall stance on frivolous lawsuits, but the McDonald's Coffee incident was far from frivolous if you spend a minute or two looking at the actual facts.
No- I've read them- I'm not ignoring them- and I have addressed it.
Fine the company for the infraction.
Don't reward stupid.0 -
heh. truth.herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha
I was complaining about Snookie buying a 2.6 M$ home here in NJ and I was like WTF does this woman have this much money. And my coworker said- because she's willing to do stupid things on TV... I was like NOOOOOOO I'm more than willing to do stupid things on TV and get paid for it!!! WHY AM I NOT A MILLIONAIRE YET!!! DMANIT! Plus I'm better looking and funnier! And smarter!!!!!
asd;lkfj;sldkfj
You can have her! She used to live in my town And when Jersey shore came out all I heard in college was "Oh you're from Poughkeepsie? Isn't that where Snookie is from"
I'm in Trenton- I don't want her- I just want to do stupid things and make an *kitten* of myself on TV and get paid- I'm significantly more .... well everything... than she is (well annoying would be a stretch- I think she has that down pat).... so it just makes me crazy that these people are so rich and famous for being stupid.
You should totally make a MFP Jersey shore! I would totally watch it haha.0 -
You never see Canadians out there suing places. I accidentally had boiling hot water spilled on my hand at a coffee shop, had a big scar for years, and I didn't go suing anyone over an accident. Has anyone sued Starbucks over charging more for soy or lactose-free milk too? I stopped ordering lattes after they revoked the free milk surcharge for Starbucks card holders, but I didn't go crying about it.
The coffee case is one of those that is really misunderstood. McDonalds had over 700 cases of burns and held their coffee at a much higher temp then recommended which caused the lady (who was sitting in a non moving vehicle) to get 3rd degree burns over 6% of her body. If the store had held the coffee at the correct temperature no burns woudl have happened. She originally asked for $20k but was awarded more in punitive damages by the jury, although the final amount was greatly reduced. For comparison, Tim Hortons (in Canada) was sued for $2 million (awarded $70K) over hot potato soup burns. (Laflamme c. Groupe TDL ltée, 2014 QCCS 312)
Canada doesn't get a free pass, there are plenty of bad lawsuits out there all over. Less actaully go to court than you think though, anyone can file, but most are dismissed early on.
nope. not buying it.
you're still an idiot if you spill you're coffee while driving-that's you're fault. it's not like you didn't know it wasn't hot. come on. She's still a nit wit.
Dunkin's coffee comes out of a nuclear reactor- I know this- and this is why I make sure it and it's lid are firmly secure before I drive off in my car. You shouldn't be able to sue because you have no godda*n common sense.
lol at you0 -
heh. truth.herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
Exactly. If she had been burned by water of an appropriate temperature she would not have had a case. It was because the water did so much more damage to her body due to its unusually high temperature.
stupidity shouldn't be rewarded with money.
but.... 'Murica haha
I was complaining about Snookie buying a 2.6 M$ home here in NJ and I was like WTF does this woman have this much money. And my coworker said- because she's willing to do stupid things on TV... I was like NOOOOOOO I'm more than willing to do stupid things on TV and get paid for it!!! WHY AM I NOT A MILLIONAIRE YET!!! DMANIT! Plus I'm better looking and funnier! And smarter!!!!!
asd;lkfj;sldkfj
You can have her! She used to live in my town And when Jersey shore came out all I heard in college was "Oh you're from Poughkeepsie? Isn't that where Snookie is from"
I'm in Trenton- I don't want her- I just want to do stupid things and make an *kitten* of myself on TV and get paid- I'm significantly more .... well everything... than she is (well annoying would be a stretch- I think she has that down pat).... so it just makes me crazy that these people are so rich and famous for being stupid.
You should totally make a MFP Jersey shore! I would totally watch it haha.
HA HA HA- we are talking about having a mini meet up in south jersey at some point with a few of us- there will be shennanigans.0 -
There's actually a documentary about the case called "Hot Coffee." Here burns were pretty horrifying. The movie actually changed my opinion on the matter 180 degrees -- mostly by presenting the facts (and images) rather than the misconceptions. Turns out the whole "frivolous lawsuit" narrative has been driven by corporations who desperately want tort reform to further shield themselves from responsibility for their actions. Like someone else said, truly frivolous lawsuits are incredibly rare and almost always thrown out, but gosh they make a good news story don't they!0
-
herrspoons wrote: »The McDonald's case was fair. No, it isn't smart to drive with coffee between your legs, but it isn't appropriate to use superheated water, which takes the coffee to an unsafe temperature.
That's what McDonald's got pinged for, not an isolated incident of someone being a dumbass, but for a failure of duty of care.
She wasn't driving. Common misconception. This was an older lady in the passanger seat and the car was parked while she took off the lid to put in suger and cream.
omg- and she sued because she spilled it while sitting in a none moving car??
I can't even.
This is what happened to her:
I'm spoilering it because it's fing terrible to look at.
0 -
Bad things happen to people all the time. sucks for them- but you shouldn't get money for it just because crappy things happen.
If that was the case- we'd all be rich- and that's just no the way this works.
0 -
Bad things happen to people all the time. sucks for them- but you shouldn't get money for it just because crappy things happen.
If that was the case- we'd all be rich- and that's just no the way this works.
But should people who did wrong be held accountable? You can't punish a business by throwing it in jail, so money is the only recourse.0 -
Bad things happen to people all the time. sucks for them- but you shouldn't get money for it just because crappy things happen.
If that was the case- we'd all be rich- and that's just no the way this works.
But should people who did wrong be held accountable? You can't punish a business by throwing it in jail, so money is the only recourse.
for the third time.
Fining/punishing the company =/= hand out and money for the person.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions