Wal-Mart sued for improperly assembled bicycle

Michael Press

In article
<eae13a35-59ff-4711-bd27-bd7fa8d0d27e@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jun 14, 11:16 pm, still just me <wheeledBobNOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Actually, if you do some reading on the McDonald's Hot Coffee Lawsuit
> > you will find that it was not at all frivolous. First, the coffee the
> > woman was served was at a temperature high enough to burn human flesh.
> > We're not talking hot coffee... we're talking scalding hot coffee.
> > Second, McDonalds knew the coffee was scalding hot. Their own internal
> > memos recognized and discussed it. The 160 degree serving temperature
> > was in their manual (All franchises are required to follow "the
> > manual" to the letter).
>
> Yes, we've been through this before.
>
> I don't drink coffee. I switched to tea way back in college, when
> coffee started bothering my stomach during late night study sessions.
>
> And fearless tea drinkers - everyone from Jolly Roger pirates to
> dainty old ladies in white floppy hats - have _always_ known that tea
> is made with water at a full, rolling biol. Hell, those little old
> ladies even pre-heat their teapots to keep the temperature up.

This they what they know, and it is true for many teas.
Other teas are much better steeped with water poured
at < 200 F. Darjeeling, for instance. Green oolong
is best steeped at 180 F, and for less than a minute.

--
Michael Press

Luke

In article <48551b84$0$3387$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, Sandy
<leurrre@free.fr> wrote:

> Dans le message de news:jm2a54553iv0fao2g611e6clmq4gggorm7@4ax.com,
> !Jones <hi@there.org> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
> > On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:29:15 -0400, in rec.bicycles.tech "Sandy"
> > <leurrre@free.fr> wrote:
> >
> >> Let it astound you as I sign this, in further confirmation of your
> >> ignorance.....
> >
> > You were arguing about Canadian provencial [sic] laws; therefore, I made
> > the
> > assumption that you were Canadian. I meant no offense.
>
> So, you were insulting which nationality? Canadian? USA?
>

The French?

still just me

On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 12:12:01 -0500, !Jones <hi@there.org> wrote:

>It can work either way. *I* wouldn't hire a lawyer thus, though. If
>your case is weak, they'll want straight quid pro quo, anyway. If
>it's strong, then they'll want first fruits; however, you can always
>get them to take an hourly rate... or, you can always *find* one who
>will; let's put it that way.

I don't know about that. PI Lawyers want to work on commission. Their
theory is that if they take the case, it's because they feel they can
win. If they win, they get all the hourly costs they would have
charged you PLUS the flat commission. It doesn't make much sense for
them to work on any other basis. If you find a lawyer willing to take
on a PI case on a non-commission basis I'd speculate that he's not
expert in the field.

still just me

On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:21:29 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:

>I'm no McDonalds fan. I enter them perhaps once in ten years, usually
>under duress. But that case, and Stella, and her lawyers, and nearly
>all the other McDonalds-suing lawyers, deserve all the mockery they've
>gotten.

Sorry, but you're wrong in this case. They knowingly served a product
that was dangerous to customers. Their files were full of external and
internal discussions and acknowledgement of the danger. They chose to
ignore the danger. They knew better. They were negligent. They
rightfully lost the suit.

I'm not legitimizing the many, many frivolous lawsuits that get filed
every year by money hungry lawyers and their clients. However, in this
case the suit was just.

Tom Kunich

"still just me" <wheeledBobNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ufdg545bb25e5l99hdpf1ahjp0kortfupv@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:21:29 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm no McDonalds fan. I enter them perhaps once in ten years, usually
>>under duress. But that case, and Stella, and her lawyers, and nearly
>>all the other McDonalds-suing lawyers, deserve all the mockery they've
>>gotten.
>
> Sorry, but you're wrong in this case.

Sorry but you're wrong.

If someone buys HOT COFFEE and doesn't know it's hot then it is a clear case
of Buyer Beware.

Frank Krygowski

On Jun 17, 6:18 pm, still just me <wheeledBobNOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 21:21:29 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>
> <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I'm no McDonalds fan. I enter them perhaps once in ten years, usually
> >under duress. But that case, and Stella, and her lawyers, and nearly
> >all the other McDonalds-suing lawyers, deserve all the mockery they've
> >gotten.
>
> Sorry, but you're wrong in this case. They knowingly served a product
> that was dangerous to customers.

As dangerous as the tea I pour every day!

> Their files were full of external and
> internal discussions and acknowledgement of the danger. They chose to
> ignore the danger. They knew better. They were negligent. They
> rightfully lost the suit.

I'll admit that I haven't seen McDonalds supposed files regarding
their hot coffee - but I'm suspicious about them being proof of
anything. Here's why.

I imagine every large corporation that deals with the public is a
constant target of ambitious lawyers, much like Microsoft, Yahoo and
Ebay are constant targets of hackers. I would expect all these
corporations have documents related to each "attack." McDonalds (or
GM, or even your public library) having such a document is not an
admission of guilt.

Yes, hot coffee is dangerous. So are sharp knives, which are (gasp!)
presented to patrons in thousands or restaurants every day. So are
power saws, which hardware stores recklessly sell to untrained
consumers. So are hammers, which have been implicated in thousands of
murders. But if Home Depot keeps records of a lawsuit ("Your hammer
was used to kill my husband in a bar fight!") it means nothing.

And BTW, I've mentioned several times that tea is properly served at
scalding temperatures. In fact, though I don't frequent such places,
I understand that tea houses serve entire pots of boiling water, along
with delicate little snacks. In the repeated discussions we've had
over Stella's McDonalds accident, nobody has explained why tea houses
aren't being sued and vilified.

Oh - except, perhaps, that their pockets are much, much less deep.

- Frank Krygowski

Carl Sundquist

"Frank Krygowski" <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4884eaa1-4d1c-4736-adf0-2a81a817fa5e@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> And BTW, I've mentioned several times that tea is properly served at
> scalding temperatures. In fact, though I don't frequent such places,
> I understand that tea houses serve entire pots of boiling water, along
> with delicate little snacks. In the repeated discussions we've had
> over Stella's McDonalds accident, nobody has explained why tea houses
> aren't being sued and vilified.
>
> Oh - except, perhaps, that their pockets are much, much less deep.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

Is holding a steaming hot cup of tea in your crotch considered proper
etiquette in a tea room?

Bill Sornson

Carl Sundquist wrote:
> "Frank Krygowski" <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4884eaa1-4d1c-4736-adf0-2a81a817fa5e@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> And BTW, I've mentioned several times that tea is properly served at
>> scalding temperatures. In fact, though I don't frequent such places,
>> I understand that tea houses serve entire pots of boiling water,
>> along with delicate little snacks. In the repeated discussions
>> we've had over Stella's McDonalds accident, nobody has explained why
>> tea houses aren't being sued and vilified.
>>
>> Oh - except, perhaps, that their pockets are much, much less deep.
>>
>> - Frank Krygowski
>
> Is holding a steaming hot cup of tea in your crotch considered proper
> etiquette in a tea room?

Do people hand patrons scalding hot tea in cardboard cups with ill-fitting
plastic pop-off tops?

Frank Krygowski

On Jun 17, 10:49 pm, "Bill Sornson" <as...@ask.me> wrote:
> Carl Sundquist wrote:
> > "Frank Krygowski" <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:4884eaa1-4d1c-4736-adf0-2a81a817fa5e@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> And BTW, I've mentioned several times that tea is properly served at
> >> scalding temperatures. In fact, though I don't frequent such places,
> >> I understand that tea houses serve entire pots of boiling water,
> >> along with delicate little snacks. In the repeated discussions
> >> we've had over Stella's McDonalds accident, nobody has explained why
> >> tea houses aren't being sued and vilified.
>
> >> Oh - except, perhaps, that their pockets are much, much less deep.
>
> >> - Frank Krygowski
>
> > Is holding a steaming hot cup of tea in your crotch considered proper
> > etiquette in a tea room?

Nope. Not in a tea room, and not in a moving car. Its considered
flagrantly stupid in either place.

> Do people hand patrons scalding hot tea in cardboard cups with ill-fitting
> plastic pop-off tops?

No, Bill, it's even worse! They serve them in thin china cups with no
insulation and no tops at all.

So are you ready to sue them?

- Frank Krygowski

Tom Kunich

<carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:7f4ffec0-b77b-4af3-aebc-41676f144c9b@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Could you please tell us whether she was the driver or the passenger,
> how old she was, and describe the extent of her injuries and
> surgeries--that is, first, second, or third degree burns, how many
> skin grafts were required, where they were, and how long she was in
> the hospital?

Can you explain what difference any of that would make? If you purchase a
cup of coffee one would naturally assume that you have the ability to drink
it without spilling it all over yourself.

Tom Kunich

"Carl Sundquist" <carlsun@cox.net> wrote in message
newsRj6k.2623$qa5.1698@newsfe13.lga...
>
> Yes, in a car/bike collision the bike is always going to be the loser and
> yes, the driver is physically protected by a multi thousand pound metal
> shield. But what about their conscience and their soul? Is there no
> acknowledgement that (at least some) drivers who have killed or gravely
> injured a cyclist suffer as well? There is plenty of fault to spread
> around whether it is drivers with cell phones or video displays or riders
> running stoplights and stop signs or making aberrent manuevers, all
> thoughtless and careless actions on the rider's part.

Carl, maybe you ought to start watching driver's behavior when you're
driving next time. I am growing more and more surprised that these people
are being allowed to drive in such a manner! I was pulled over by the
Highway Patrol and my car was seized and towed because it had an out of date
license sticker (DMV made an entry mistake saying I owned money on the car
and so the finance company owned it - trouble is that there was no other
name on the pink slip and hence PLAINLY there was no finance company to own
it).

While that officer was doing that there were tractor trailers passing us IN
THE COMMUTER LANES at 70 mph. After towing my vehicle the officer got back
in her car and drove back to the office where she was awarded (no kidding!)
Officer of the Month.

Carl Sundquist

"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote in message
news:RLadnVczFvbrVsTVnZ2dnUVZ_rmdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
> "Carl Sundquist" <carlsun@cox.net> wrote in message
> newsRj6k.2623$qa5.1698@newsfe13.lga...
>>
>> Yes, in a car/bike collision the bike is always going to be the loser and
>> yes, the driver is physically protected by a multi thousand pound metal
>> shield. But what about their conscience and their soul? Is there no
>> acknowledgement that (at least some) drivers who have killed or gravely
>> injured a cyclist suffer as well? There is plenty of fault to spread
>> around whether it is drivers with cell phones or video displays or riders
>> running stoplights and stop signs or making aberrent manuevers, all
>> thoughtless and careless actions on the rider's part.
>
> Carl, maybe you ought to start watching driver's behavior when you're
> driving next time. I am growing more and more surprised that these people
> are being allowed to drive in such a manner! I was pulled over by the
> Highway Patrol and my car was seized and towed because it had an out of
> date license sticker (DMV made an entry mistake saying I owned money on
> the car and so the finance company owned it - trouble is that there was no
> other name on the pink slip and hence PLAINLY there was no finance company
> to own it).
>
> While that officer was doing that there were tractor trailers passing us
> IN THE COMMUTER LANES at 70 mph. After towing my vehicle the officer got
> back in her car and drove back to the office where she was awarded (no
> kidding!) Officer of the Month.
>

Tom,

I'm not saying there isn't much reprehensible conduct on the part of motor
vehicle drivers. There is far too much and it does seem to be getting worse
daily. Regardless, what happened to you does not change the fact that some
bicycle riders are at fault in tragic accidents and that some drivers suffer
emotionally for it.

Tom Kunich

"Carl Sundquist" <carlsun@cox.net> wrote in message
news:Ibk6k.2631$qa5.924@newsfe13.lga...
>
> I'm not saying there isn't much reprehensible conduct on the part of motor
> vehicle drivers. There is far too much and it does seem to be getting
> worse daily. Regardless, what happened to you does not change the fact
> that some bicycle riders are at fault in tragic accidents and that some
> drivers suffer emotionally for it.

I'll agree that many bicycle accidents are caused by the rider. Even the
people I ride with will often run stop signs without looking. While I also
will run back street stop signs, I only do so when I can see that it is
clear.

And I have seen bicyclists (thank heavens none that I ride with) run stop
lights THROUGH MOVING TRAFFIC.

Stupidity knows no bounds. Just because you're on a bicycle doesn't make you
smart.

still just me

On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 15:29:17 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo.
com> wrote:

>Sorry but you're wrong.
>
>If someone buys HOT COFFEE and doesn't know it's hot then it is a clear case
>of Buyer Beware.

You don't understand the difference between HOT and DANGEROUS to human
flesh. Thankfully the court did.