That is a false equivalency. They never claimed that the cup was defective. The equivalency is not that the knife is defective, but too sharp. The claim was not that the cup or coffee was defective, it was simply too hot. The US needs to end the lawsuit lottery mentality.
The coffee was dangerously hot, hotter than other commercially available coffees. People were getting injured, mcdonalds knew people were getting injured, they didn't do anything about it, they got sued and lost. The people responsible for the decisions don't care unless the settlement is big enough to make them care.
"Dangerously" The use of subjective adjectives does not change the fact that the cause of the injury was the fault of the woman's ability to successfully operate a cup. This is a perfect example of why we need tort reform.
We don't need tort reform, McDonalds needed to not ignore all the injuries they were causing. The jury made them pay attention. All your shilling for corporations won't change that fact.
(post is archived)