Allure Massage

Stella Awards

Questor

New member
Sep 15, 2001
4,549
1
0
I think you will find these quite amusing. And when you think about it, quite alarming.

Stella Awards

It's time again for the annual Stella Awards. For those unfamiliar with these awards, they are named after 81-year-old Stella Liebeck who spilled hot coffee on herself and successfully sued the McDonald's in New Mexico , where she purchased coffee. You remember, she took the lid off the coffee and put it between her knees while she was driving. Who would ever think one could get burned doing that, right? That's right; these are awards for the most outlandish lawsuits and verdicts in the U.S. You know, the kinds of cases that make you scratch your head and say WTF.

Here are the Stellas for the past year:


* SEVENTH PLACE *

Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas, was awarded $80,000 by a jury of her peers after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was running inside a furniture store. The store owners were understandably surprised by the verdict, considering the running toddler was her own son


* SIXTH PLACE *

Carl Truman, 19, of Los Angeles , California , won $74,000 plus medical expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord. Truman apparently didn't notice there was someone at the wheel of the car when he was trying to steal his neighbor's hubcaps.



* FIFTH PLACE *

Terrence Dickson, of Bristol , Pennsylvania , who was leaving a house he had just burglarized by way of the garage. Unfortunately for Dickson, the automatic garage door opener malfunctioned and he could not get the garage door to open. Worse, he couldn't re-enter the house because the door connecting the garage to the house locked when Dickson pulled it shut. Forced to sit for eight, count 'em, EIGHT days and survive on a case of Pepsi and a large bag of dry dog food, he sued the homeowner's insurance company claiming undue mental anguish. Amazingly, the jury said the insurance company must pay Dickson $500,000 for his anguish. We should all have this kind of anguish.


* FOURTH PLACE *

Jerry Williams, of Little Rock, Arkansas, garnered 4th Place in the Stella's when he was awarded $14,500 plus medical expenses after being bitten on the butt by his next door neighbor's beagle - even though the beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced yard. Williams did not get as much as he asked for because the jury believed the beagle might have been provoked at the time of the butt bite because Williams had climbed over the fence into the yard and repeatedly shot the dog with a pellet gun.



* THIRD PLACE *

Amber Carson of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, because a jury ordered a Philadelphia restaurant to pay her $113,500 after she slipped on a spilled soft drink and broke her tailbone. The reason the soft drink was on the floor: Ms. Carson had thrown it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier during an argument.



*SECOND PLACE*

Kara Walton, of Claymont , Delaware , sued the owner of a night club in a nearby city because she fell from the bathroom window to the floor, knocking out her two front teeth. Even though Ms.Walton was trying to sneak through the ladies room window to avoid paying the $3.50 cover charge, the jury said the night club had to pay her $12,000 ..... oh, yeah, plus dental expenses.


* FIRST PLACE *

This year's runaway First Place Stella Award winner was: Mrs. Merv Grazinski, of Oklahoma City , Oklahoma , who purchased new 32-foot Winnebago motor home. On her first trip home, from an OU football game, having driven on to the freeway, she set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the driver's seat to go to the back of the Winnebago to make herself a sandwich. Not surprisingly, the motor home left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Also not surprisingly, Mrs. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not putting in the owner's manual that she couldn't actually leave the driver's seat while the cruise control was set. The Oklahoma jury awarded her - are you sitting down? --- $1,750,000 PLUS a new motor home. Winnebago actually changed their manuals as a result of this suit, just in case Mrs. Grazinski has any relatives who might also buy a motor home.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
These are all false and were circulated by various business interests in an attempt to influence the tort reform discussion.

There are a real set of Stellas that look at odd lawsuit outcomes but these are completely fiction.

Now what say you customer?
 

Questor

New member
Sep 15, 2001
4,549
1
0
These are all false and were circulated by various business interests in an attempt to influence the tort reform discussion.

There are a real set of Stellas that look at odd lawsuit outcomes but these are completely fiction.

Now what say you customer?
Thank you both for clearing that up. I did do a bit of research before posting and found the Stella Awards site, noted that they didn't have such a list posted, but then failed to jump to the conclusion that the list was false. Given that the Stella Awards do in fact exist, can we assume that Stella Lieback did in fact successfully sue for spilling coffee on herself? I believe Seinfeld did a whole episode based on that, where Kramer spilled coffee on himself.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
There sure was and she offered to settle the case for $20,000 to pay her medical bills.

Here is the wiki link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants

Other documents obtained from McDonald's showed that from 1982 to 1992 the company had received more than 700 reports of people burned by McDonald's coffee to varying degrees of severity, and had settled claims arising from scalding injuries for more than $500,000.[5] McDonald's quality control manager, Christopher Appleton, testified that this number of injuries was insufficient to cause the company to evaluate its practices. He argued that all foods hotter than 130 °F (54 °C) constituted a burn hazard, and that restaurants had more pressing dangers to warn about. The plaintiffs argued that Appleton conceded that McDonald's coffee would burn the mouth and throat if consumed when served.[18]
 

avxl1003

New member
Aug 31, 2009
1,346
0
0
I feel the need to come to Stella's defense. The following is an exerpt from Wikipedia.

"On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49 cent cup of coffee from the drive-through window of a local McDonald's restaurant. Liebeck was in the passenger's seat of her Ford Probe, and her nephew Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. Stella placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap.[10] Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin.[11] Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent.[12] She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her down to 83 pounds.[13] Two years of medical treatment followed."

A lot of ignorant people make fun of this poor woman for being stupid, but in actual fact she was not. The car was parked, and she was adding cream and sugar to the coffee which was sitting between her legs. She wasn't even in the drivers seat. The amount she suffered was outrageous. There was never a question that the McDonalds had been negligent in sending out a coffee that was as hot as this cup was. Not to mention the fact that they had been sending out extremely hot coffees in cups that were poorly designed.

Now on top of all this, Stella still had originally only wanted McDonalds to pay her medical bills and lost wages (around $20,000). It was only when McDonalds turned down and then offered a mere $800.00 (and then refused to budge) that she initiated a lawsuit.

I think we should all give this lady a rest.. And stop telling future generations about a "stupid woman who sued McDonalds because her coffee was too hot".
 

Tangwhich

New member
Jan 26, 2004
2,261
0
0
I think we should all give this lady a rest.. And stop telling future generations about a "stupid woman who sued McDonalds because her coffee was too hot".
Your posting gave me no additional sympathy for her. Coffee is hot, everyone knows that. She made a poor decision, we all do from time to time. It's unfortuante but it was still 100% her fault.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
Your posting gave me no additional sympathy for her. Coffee is hot, everyone knows that. She made a poor decision, we all do from time to time. It's unfortuante but it was still 100% her fault.
Yup, coffee is hot.

So I guess you think it is okay to serve a product that at trail MacDonald's quality control manager admitted was "unsafe for human consumption."

I also know that the jury was outraged that 700 people had been scalded by the product and many recommendations to serve it at a lower temperature had been ignored.

Oh...and she was 20% at fault not 100.
 

Tangwhich

New member
Jan 26, 2004
2,261
0
0
Yup, coffee is hot.

So I guess you think it is okay to serve a product that at trail MacDonald's quality control manager admitted was "unsafe for human consumption."

I also know that the jury was outraged that 700 people had been scalded by the product and many recommendations to serve it at a lower temperature had been ignored.

Oh...and she was 20% at fault not 100.
Many people die or get injured by fast cars. Maybe we should limit speeds to 50km/h to reduce those?

I like to enjoy a cup of tea once in a while, but right after I've made it I know that it's "unsafe for human consumption". I wait for it to cool down before I can safely drink it. If I put it between my legs to add some milk and sugar and then spilt it on myself, I'd look towards a mirror when I want to assign blame.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
Many people die or get injured by fast cars. Maybe we should limit speeds to 50km/h to reduce those?

I like to enjoy a cup of tea once in a while, but right after I've made it I know that it's "unsafe for human consumption". I wait for it to cool down before I can safely drink it. If I put it between my legs to add some milk and sugar and then spilt it on myself, I'd look towards a mirror when I want to assign blame.
Enjoy the mirror.

But before you do perhaps you should grab a text on product liability and see what it means when you sell a product that is unsafe for human consumption.

Or what it means when you know the normal use of your product has caused 700 injuries and you do nothing to correct it.
 

Tangwhich

New member
Jan 26, 2004
2,261
0
0
Enjoy the mirror.

But before you do perhaps you should grab a text on product liability and see what it means when you sell a product that is unsafe for human consumption.

Or what it means when you know the normal use of your product has caused 700 injuries and you do nothing to correct it.
Ground beef is unsafe for human consumption until you take appropriate steps (ie cook it) after purchased. Should we sue supermarkets for selling us this dangerous product in an unsafe form?

How many cups of coffee are sold a year and what percentage of those is represented by 700. A fraction of a fraction of fraction?

I don't have statistics handy but I know the number of people injured every year while using the toilet is shockingly high. Should we take steps to remove toilets from society?

Life is full of risk. Those 700 people were either unlucky or stupid, but that's life. Sometimes shit happens and people have to accept the blame for their own mistakes or misfortunes.
 

avxl1003

New member
Aug 31, 2009
1,346
0
0
Many people die or get injured by fast cars. Maybe we should limit speeds to 50km/h to reduce those?

I like to enjoy a cup of tea once in a while, but right after I've made it I know that it's "unsafe for human consumption". I wait for it to cool down before I can safely drink it. If I put it between my legs to add some milk and sugar and then spilt it on myself, I'd look towards a mirror when I want to assign blame.
It was not a stupid move to sit in a parked car with a coffee (that she bought from a DRIVE THRU WINDOW) between her legs to put cream and sugar in. It was 100% reasonable for her to believe that she could do this without suffering 3rd degree burns. Unreasonable is the assumption that by buying a 50 cent cup of coffee you are knowingly and willingly accepting the risk of 3rd degree burns.

And yes, driving fast cars is dangerous. Everybody understands that driving fast cars is dangerous. But I have news for you.. Steps are already taken by car manufacturers to reduce the number of deaths and injuries in cars, and they're called seatbelts. You're also required to take a test before you're allowed to drive a car. There are also hundreds of laws out there to try to reduce the chance of being in an accident in the first place (drunk driving laws, speed limits, traffic lights, school zones, etc.,.). This is all because we all realize that driving cars is dangerous.

But does everybody perceive putting cream and sugar in your coffee as dangerous? Absolutely not. Were there any precautions taken by McDonalds to try to stop somebody from getting burned? Nope, none whatsoever. Just a claim that it had to be dangerously and outrageously hot so it would taste better.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
Ground beef is unsafe for human consumption until you take appropriate steps (ie cook it) after purchased. Should we sue supermarkets for selling us this dangerous product in an unsafe form?

How many cups of coffee are sold a year and what percentage of those is represented by 700. A fraction of a fraction of fraction?

I don't have statistics handy but I know the number of people injured every year while using the toilet is shockingly high. Should we take steps to remove toilets from society?

Life is full of risk. Those 700 people were either unlucky or stupid, but that's life. Sometimes shit happens and people have to accept the blame for their own mistakes or misfortunes.
Good thing you were not on the jury...or the Court of Appeal...but if you were you would have been better informed...

Sometimes shit does happen...and sometimes you hurt 700 people, pay them hundreds of thousands of dollars and somebody ways to you "hey that is dangerously hot...why don't you turn it down" and you do nothing...
 

Tangwhich

New member
Jan 26, 2004
2,261
0
0
It was not a stupid move to sit in a parked car with a coffee (that she bought from a DRIVE THRU WINDOW) between her legs to put cream and sugar in. It was 100% reasonable for her to believe that she could do this without suffering 3rd degree burns. Unreasonable is the assumption that by buying a 50 cent cup of coffee you are knowingly and willingly accepting the risk of 3rd degree burns.
I didn't realize that purchasing through a drive thru meant mandatory consumption in your car. I was under the mistaken belief that it was just a convenient method of purchase. Should drive thru coffee be sold at room temperature to ensure the safety or consumers? Or can it be a bit warmer than that?

You are entitled to your opinion but I don't understand how you can believe that it's reaonable for a person to believe that a cup of coffee cannot burn them. On the contrary, even from as young as I can remember I've know that tea and coffee can burn me. If I bought a tea that was NOT hot I would be returning it.
 

Tangwhich

New member
Jan 26, 2004
2,261
0
0
Good thing you were not on the jury...or the Court of Appeal...but if you were you would have been better informed...

Sometimes shit does happen...and sometimes you hurt 700 people, pay them hundreds of thousands of dollars and somebody ways to you "hey that is dangerously hot...why don't you turn it down" and you do nothing...
Better informed? Maybe there are facts that I'm not aware of that would shed a different light on it. But with the facts that I have I still believe the woman is at fault.
 

rld

New member
Oct 12, 2010
10,664
2
0
Better informed? Maybe there are facts that I'm not aware of that would shed a different light on it. But with the facts that I have I still believe the woman is at fault.
You would be better informed on the law which forms the basis for your decision.

And coffee should be sold around 140-160 or so.

How about soup? If I go to let's same Timmy's and buy some soup and take it over to the table and get jostled on the way and it gets spilled on my leg, should I suffer third degree burns?
 

avxl1003

New member
Aug 31, 2009
1,346
0
0
I didn't realize that purchasing through a drive thru meant mandatory consumption in your car. I was under the mistaken belief that it was just a convenient method of purchase. Should drive thru coffee be sold at room temperature to ensure the safety or consumers? Or can it be a bit warmer than that?

You are entitled to your opinion but I don't understand how you can believe that it's reaonable for a person to believe that a cup of coffee cannot burn them. On the contrary, even from as young as I can remember I've know that tea and coffee can burn me. If I bought a tea that was NOT hot I would be returning it.

Bah, you're ridiculous. Just because I don't want it to give me 3rd degree burns doesn't mean I want it room temperature. There ARE several degrees between 21 and 88 (88 being the temperature at which the McDonalds coffee was served). Almost all home coffee makers max out at around 65 degrees with many maxing out below 65.

And nobody is suggesting that Drive Thru means mandatory consumption in your car (there you go with your black and white again). But it does mean that one should feel safe in consuming it in ones car if they choose to. I'll tell you what Drive Thru doesn't mean, it doesn't mean "Whatever you do, do not consume this for at least 5 or 10 minutes. And certainly NOT in your car."
 

Tangwhich

New member
Jan 26, 2004
2,261
0
0
You would be better informed on the law which forms the basis for your decision.

And coffee should be sold around 140-160 or so.

How about soup? If I go to let's same Timmy's and buy some soup and take it over to the table and get jostled on the way and it gets spilled on my leg, should I suffer third degree burns?
I am not American so I am not familiar with US law. That said just because something may be the law doesn't always make it right. I'm sure there are many members here that oppose various laws regarding prostitution and would be sympathetic to others that were arrested/charged because of those laws.

Regarding the soup, I don't eat it so I'm not sure what temperature it is supposed to be served at. I would imagine that if it's hot enough to burn, then it would come with a lid.
As I said earlier I do drink tea and I expect it to be HOT. I also expect it to come with a lid and I also expect that it would burn me if I got it on my skin. I often have to remove tea bags but I'm not foolish enough to do it between my legs.
 

OddSox

Active member
May 3, 2006
3,148
2
36
Ottawa
As I said earlier I do drink tea and I expect it to be HOT. I also expect it to come with a lid and I also expect that it would burn me if I got it on my skin. I often have to remove tea bags but I'm not foolish enough to do it between my legs.
Apparently you have no idea what a third degree burn is. Good luck with your tea.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts