Lady wants $170k for spilled coffee.
May 30, 2013, 3:14 pm
#16
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K MM, Marriott Life Plat, various others of little note
Posts: 2,763
Yes. 
And lets not be too hasty here, given how vile freshpoo is when drank, it might also do major exterior damage as well, plus leaving your clothes smelling as bad as your breath...
On the "merits" I am surprised they could get the coffee hot enough to skald her. The problem given less air pressure is that they can't brew it hot enough. I would be surprised if the coffee could be anywhere near 180 degrees (what caused the injury in the McD case), and it was likely under 160 degrees.
McDonalds lost because they - contrary to industry standards/recommendations - served coffee at 180 degrees, did so, according to their own documents as they wanted coffee that would stay hot, but did not want to buy more expensive cups, so went with coffee as hot as they could get, and then they had gotten over 700 reports of people being burned by their coffee. The response of McD when deposed was to say 700 people getting injured was not enough for them to change their practice and buy slightly more expensive cups. The punitive damages verdict was to make them change, and McD did.
And lets not be too hasty here, given how vile freshpoo is when drank, it might also do major exterior damage as well, plus leaving your clothes smelling as bad as your breath...
On the "merits" I am surprised they could get the coffee hot enough to skald her. The problem given less air pressure is that they can't brew it hot enough. I would be surprised if the coffee could be anywhere near 180 degrees (what caused the injury in the McD case), and it was likely under 160 degrees.
McDonalds lost because they - contrary to industry standards/recommendations - served coffee at 180 degrees, did so, according to their own documents as they wanted coffee that would stay hot, but did not want to buy more expensive cups, so went with coffee as hot as they could get, and then they had gotten over 700 reports of people being burned by their coffee. The response of McD when deposed was to say 700 people getting injured was not enough for them to change their practice and buy slightly more expensive cups. The punitive damages verdict was to make them change, and McD did.
May 30, 2013, 4:11 pm
#17
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: MDE
Programs: AA-PLT, HH-GLD, PP
Posts: 1,511
...On the "merits" I am surprised they could get the coffee hot enough to skald her. The problem given less air pressure is that they can't brew it hot enough. I would be surprised if the coffee could be anywhere near 180 degrees (what caused the injury in the McD case), and it was likely under 160 degrees.
The reason that cooking times for boiled foods are longer at altitude is that the boiling temperature is lower. If you are poaching at something less than boiling, there is no difference.
I live at 7,100', and I make scalding hot coffee every day.
May 30, 2013, 5:00 pm
#18
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: body: A stone's throw from SFO, mind: SE Asia
Programs: Some of this 'n some of that
Posts: 17,263
I agree with most of what you said, but it is not true that you cannot make liquids very hot at altitude. The lower air pressure only lowers the boiling point of water, essentially the upper limit of the temperature. (e.g. at 8,000', the boiling point of water is 191.6 degrees F [91.6 degrees C]). However, you can heat water up to that point just as easily as you can at sea level.
The reason that cooking times for boiled foods are longer at altitude is that the boiling temperature is lower. If you are poaching at something less than boiling, there is no difference.
I live at 7,100', and I make scalding hot coffee every day.
The reason that cooking times for boiled foods are longer at altitude is that the boiling temperature is lower. If you are poaching at something less than boiling, there is no difference.
I live at 7,100', and I make scalding hot coffee every day.
The point is at sea level water can be heated to a higher point than at elevation. That your coffee is scalding hot does not mean it's the same temperature as scalding hot coffee in the Mission District SF.
May 30, 2013, 5:02 pm
#19
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: SJC
Programs: UA 1MM
Posts: 262
Ridiculous. And thanks for the McDonald's case link, which seems to want to temper criticism of the case as frivolous, yet it still makes my blood boil. Well at least heated to 180 degrees, that is.
May 30, 2013, 5:04 pm
#20
Join Date: Oct 2009
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 311
Combine consecutive posts of same member.
I don't see any contradiction. The OP seems to just be saying that water can be heated really hot. Even shows the difference b/t sea level and his altitude.
Last edited by Ocn Vw 1K; May 31, 2013 at 12:05 pm
May 30, 2013, 5:49 pm
#21
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
I agree with most of what you said, but it is not true that you cannot make liquids very hot at altitude. The lower air pressure only lowers the boiling point of water, essentially the upper limit of the temperature. (e.g. at 8,000', the boiling point of water is 191.6 degrees F [91.6 degrees C]). However, you can heat water up to that point just as easily as you can at sea level.
The reason that cooking times for boiled foods are longer at altitude is that the boiling temperature is lower. If you are poaching at something less than boiling, there is no difference.
I live at 7,100', and I make scalding hot coffee every day.
The reason that cooking times for boiled foods are longer at altitude is that the boiling temperature is lower. If you are poaching at something less than boiling, there is no difference.
I live at 7,100', and I make scalding hot coffee every day.
Coffee that is brewed on the ground, and is at boiling, is at 212 degrees. It then cools down.
Water boils at 8000 feet at 197.4 degrees (that is ONE OF THE FIGURES I got: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_altitude_cooking no idea why they would vary if one assumes a standard pressure, but they are all around 196-197 degrees). This is about the elevation of a pressurized plane.
So if you put two cups of water side by side, one at 212 degrees, one at 197.4, the temperature in both will drop at nearly identical rates.
If you make coffee at 8000 feet, the water enters the pot at less than 197 degrees, then it cools in the pot some, then you put it on the cart (this woman was in coach) but the time it gets to her enough heat will have disapaited that its hard for me to see it being at 180 degrees, and given he only got 2nd degree burns, I am assuming it was more like 160-170 degrees MAX.
But, had it started at just under 212, sat for the same time, it might have been more like 180 when it hit her.
May 30, 2013, 10:27 pm
#22
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: CT/NY
Programs: UA 1K/1MM, AA EXP, Marriott LT Titanium, Hyatt Globalist, IHG Plat Amb
Posts: 6,021
Oh wow, $170K, When I first clicked I thought it was just $170. I clicked it because it reminded me of an employee of former client.
So I was working for a client, and he invited all of his staff to a meeting and one of my co-workers was sitting next to some guy who worked for the client. My co-worker spilled a little coffee on the table and the clients employee put his sleeve in it. The guy jumped up in the middle of the meeting yelling that my co-worker ruined his shirt, the guy started flailing and demanding we buy him a new shirt. I said I would talk to him after the meeting, and then gave him $10 for dry cleaning. He threw it back in my face, and a few days later filed a small claims case for $190 + court costs, stating it was a brand new $190 shirt. Sadly, we settled and paid him the full $190 + filing fee to keep the client happy.
So I was working for a client, and he invited all of his staff to a meeting and one of my co-workers was sitting next to some guy who worked for the client. My co-worker spilled a little coffee on the table and the clients employee put his sleeve in it. The guy jumped up in the middle of the meeting yelling that my co-worker ruined his shirt, the guy started flailing and demanding we buy him a new shirt. I said I would talk to him after the meeting, and then gave him $10 for dry cleaning. He threw it back in my face, and a few days later filed a small claims case for $190 + court costs, stating it was a brand new $190 shirt. Sadly, we settled and paid him the full $190 + filing fee to keep the client happy.
That is just ridiculous. Is this some kind of super coffee where the stain can't be cleansed?
May 31, 2013, 8:18 am
#24
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: DEN
Programs: Recovering after 7 years of UA 1K, Still UA Silver (Which means nothing), Marriott Lifetime Plat Pre
Posts: 1,950
From that moment on, we referred to the guy as, "The Shirt".
I agree with mgcsinc, super small settlement, but still seems like a total joke. Who sues over coffee on there sleeve? I wanted to go to court just to see what happened. My theory is he would get awarded dry cleaning costs and no filing fee, or worst case scenario, a deprecated shirt value. And I still don't believe the shirt was $190, though it was a nice looking shirt.
May 31, 2013, 8:33 am
#25
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SJC, SFO, YYC
Programs: AA-EXP, AA-0.41MM, UA-Gold, Ex UA-1K (2006 thru 2015), PMUA-0.95MM, COUA-1.5MM-lite, AF-Silver
Posts: 13,437
Anyway, coffee is hot. You take a risk ordering it. You can pick beverages that are a safe room temperature. This suit, and the McDonalds suit are silly.
May 31, 2013, 8:43 am
#26
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
We live in a very complex world. Sometimes large, well-(self-)insured companies are in a position to make small centralized changes that significantly reduce the risk of the occasional individual having their life seriously impacted by an accident. We made a decision as a society, long ago, to force companies to make such centralized changes and pass on the cost (which is tiny on a per-sale basis) to consumers. We're much better off for it.
May 31, 2013, 9:14 am
#27
Formerly known as CollegeFlyer
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: JRA
Programs: UA 1K MM, AA PLT, Hyatt Diamond, Marriott Gold, Hertz 5*
Posts: 6,716
Originally Posted by emanon256
I agree with mgcsinc, super small settlement, but still seems like a total joke. Who sues over coffee on there sleeve? I wanted to go to court just to see what happened. My theory is he would get awarded dry cleaning costs and no filing fee, or worst case scenario, a deprecated shirt value. And I still don't believe the shirt was $190, though it was a nice looking shirt.
), since he claimed it was worthless now. Rather than take the $190 from you, dry clean the shirt for $10, and just get a $180 windfall profit.But I'm sure he didn't see it that way (based on your description)..he sounds like a DYKWIA who thought he was entitled to the $180 windfall profit for his "trouble," or just knew he could get it from you through extortion because his company was a client.
I highly doubt that he would have gotten $190+filing fees in court. Although you could have lost the client for it if you went to court and basically embarrassed him by winning the case or only having to pay him a small amount.
Last edited by l etoile; May 31, 2013 at 10:17 am Reason: Fix quote attribution
May 31, 2013, 9:26 am
#28
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: DEN
Programs: Recovering after 7 years of UA 1K, Still UA Silver (Which means nothing), Marriott Lifetime Plat Pre
Posts: 1,950
If you paid for the entire cost of the shirt, the client's employee should have had to give you the shirt (with proof of purchase price ), since he claimed it was worthless now. Rather than take the $190 from you, dry clean the shirt for $10, and just get a $180 windfall profit.
But I'm sure he didn't see it that way (based on your description)..he sounds like a DYKWIA who thought he was entitled to the $180 windfall profit for his "trouble," or just knew he could get it from you through extortion because his company was a client.
I highly doubt that he would have gotten $190+filing fees in court. Although you could have lost the client for it if you went to court and basically embarrassed him by winning the case or only having to pay him a small amount.
), since he claimed it was worthless now. Rather than take the $190 from you, dry clean the shirt for $10, and just get a $180 windfall profit.But I'm sure he didn't see it that way (based on your description)..he sounds like a DYKWIA who thought he was entitled to the $180 windfall profit for his "trouble," or just knew he could get it from you through extortion because his company was a client.
I highly doubt that he would have gotten $190+filing fees in court. Although you could have lost the client for it if you went to court and basically embarrassed him by winning the case or only having to pay him a small amount.
May 31, 2013, 9:29 am
#29
Formerly known as CollegeFlyer
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: JRA
Programs: UA 1K MM, AA PLT, Hyatt Diamond, Marriott Gold, Hertz 5*
Posts: 6,716
Sadly we didn't get the shirt, or proof, or anything. My company high-ups stepped in and sent some legal release letter that he signed to get the $190 plus filing fees. They just wanted to make the problem go away as quickly as possible. I agree, total DYKWIA, and he probably sues a lot of people to get his way. I wonder how many other people/companies he has sued over petty issues. I think the filing fee was only $10 in NY too, so its easy to sue anyone and everyone.
May 31, 2013, 9:34 am
#30
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: DEN
Programs: Recovering after 7 years of UA 1K, Still UA Silver (Which means nothing), Marriott Lifetime Plat Pre
Posts: 1,950
And when I say spilled coffee, I am talking a small drop that was barely even noticeable. "The Shirt" is totally nuts!!!