A Cleburne, Texas woman hopes to put the Cowboys and owner Jerry Jones on the hot seat after getting burned herself.

According to dallasnews.com, the woman, Jennelle Carrillo, filed a lawsuit in Tarrant County saying she suffered third-degree burns, mental anguish, physical pain and disfigurement from sitting on a bench outside Cowboys Stadium.

The lawsuit states that she sat on the black marble bench before entering a Cowboys scrimmage at the stadium in August of 2010.

The lawsuit describes the bench as being "openly exposed to the extremely hot August sun" and said Carrillo required skin grafts to treat her burns.

"No signs were posted at or near the bench warning it was too hot for persons to sit," the lawsuit states.

The lawsuit goes on to demand a jury trial to recover court fees, damages and interest.

The Cowboys have not responded to the suit.

OK lady. Drop your drawers and let's the damage. Then again since you're claiming damage to your ass you should remove your hat.

Shale wrote:

No sign saying a Texas bench in the sun is too hot to sit on?

I work with mentally retarded ppl in South Florida who can't read a sign and they have sense enuf not to sit on a hot bench until their ass is burned.

Let's hope the court throws this one out, but don't hold your breath. Remember the stupid woman who spilled hot coffee won her case. Need a sign on the cup saying 'coffee is hot - don't spill it on your lap'

I used to think that too and I'm not saying she deserved millions of dollars in damages (she initially asked for $20,000 to cover her medical expenses) but have you seen pictures of her injuries?



So on second thought, if the woman in Texas has burns on her ass like this I say fuck Ferry Jones and the Cowboys. Eh, fuck 'em anyway 'cause they're Jerry Jones and the Cowboys.

Al, those are the McD's coffee lady's injuries/burns?

RedBedroom wrote:

Al, those are the McD's coffee lady's injuries/burns?

As far as I know Red.

http://truecrimejunkie.com/uncategorized/the-infamous-mcdonalds-hot-coffee-case-what-you-didnt-know-graphic-photos/

McDonald's reportedly served their coffee at temps of 180–190 °F. Water boils at 212 °F

Alan Smithee wrote:

As far as I know Red.

http://truecrimejunkie.com/uncategorized/the-infamous-mcdonalds-hot-coffee-case-what-you-didnt-know-graphic-photos/

McDonald's reportedly served their coffee at temps of 180–190 °F. Water boils at 212 °F

Nobody can drink coffee at 180-190 degrees, meat requires heat of what, 160 degrees to fully cook? But when you get a cheeseburger from any fast food place you are most likely NOT going to burn your mouth if you dig into it right away, certainly not like you would drinking that coffee. So if they can keep the burgers just hot enough to melt the cheese but not hot enough to blister your mouth, why can't they do something with the coffee too?

I've known their apple pies are deadly for years!

Supernova wrote:

Nobody can drink coffee at 180-190 degrees, meat requires heat of what, 160 degrees to fully cook? But when you get a cheeseburger from any fast food place you are most likely NOT going to burn your mouth if you dig into it right away, certainly not like you would drinking that coffee. So if they can keep the burgers just hot enough to melt the cheese but not hot enough to blister your mouth, why can't they do something with the coffee too?

When I heard that she won all that money I thot 'now they will be selling coffee at 105 degrees F.' I personally like my coffee hot, like near boiling, probably as hot as this was. Now we will assume it was less that 212 degrees F or it would have been bubbling.

What also got me with the coffee burns and the ass burns is that no one takes responsibility for their own stupidity. The coffee was meant to be sipped, not poured down your legs. Who poured the coffee down the woman's legs? SHE DID!

Shale, I think that statement about her pouring the coffee down her own legs is as reckless as the ones perpetuating the falsehood that she did it while driving. Eh, don't feel too bad I guess because a woman reporting on the Dallas case on TV did the same thing (said the woman spilled the coffee on herself while driving). But if you still maintain that it's a person's own fault if they suffer 3rd degree burns because they accidentally spill a scalding liquid on themselves, I hope you never accidentally drop a cup of coffee on your cut-off denim covered crotch that's been served at the temperature you prefer. And if you do and try to have your medical expenses covered, the lawyers defending the people who served you the coffee may argue that your age may have caused your injuries to have been worse than they might have been in a younger individual, since older skin is thinner and more vulnerable to injury. Just as McDonald's lawyers argued

I know a kid who has burn scars on his body from the gravy at KFC, apparently they make it comparably hot to McDonald's coffee, what the hell?

I'm sorry Shale, you're just not getting the point. It's not Ronald M's fault she spilled the coffee. It's his fault because he had a knowing, willful disregard of the consequences of his corporate practices that could and had previously resulted in these kinds of injuries.

Quote :

There is a lot of hype about the McDonalds' scalding coffee case. No one is in favor of frivolous cases of outlandish results; however, it is important to understand some points that were not reported in most of the stories about the case. McDonalds coffee was not only hot, it was scalding -- capable of almost instantaneous destruction of skin, flesh and muscle. Here's the whole story.

Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson's car when she was severely burned by McDonalds' coffee in February 1992. Liebeck, 79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served in a styrofoam cup at the drivethrough window of a local McDonalds.

After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap.

The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused.

During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard.

McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.

Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee.

Plaintiffs' expert, a scholar in thermodynamics applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn.

McDonalds asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there. However, the companys own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving.

McDonalds also argued that consumers know coffee is hot and that its customers want it that way. The company admitted its customers were unaware that they could suffer thirddegree burns from the coffee and that a statement on the side of the cup was not a "warning" but a "reminder" since the location of the writing would not warn customers of the hazard.

The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages. This amount was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found Liebeck 20 percent at fault in the spill. The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, which equals about two days of McDonalds' coffee sales.
Post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the local Albuquerque McDonalds had dropped to 158 degrees fahrenheit.

The trial court subsequently reduced the punitive award to $480,000 -- or three times compensatory damages -- even though the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous and willful.

No one will ever know the final ending to this case.

The parties eventually entered into a secret settlement which has never been revealed to the public, despite the fact that this was a public case, litigated in public and subjected to extensive media reporting. Such secret settlements, after public trials, should not be condoned.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm/

Was it Ford's fault that Pinto drivers were getting into rear end collisions? No. Was it Ford's fault that they rushed that model into production because they needed to compete with Volkswagen even though they knew from pre-production tests of the risk of fire from ruptured gas tanks but decided to go ahead anyway because assembly lines had already been set up for production and even though Ford owned the patent on a safer gas tank? Yes. McDonald's thought their coffee tasted better at such a high temperature and didn't want their coffee sales to suffer. There are plenty of examples of ridiculous lawsuits. This isn't one of them.

Alan Smithee wrote:

I'm sorry Shale, you're just not getting the point. It's not Ronald M's fault she spilled the coffee. It's his fault because he had a knowing, willful disregard of the consequences of his corporate practices that could and had previously resulted in these kinds of injuries. ...

I get your point, perhaps you are not getting mine. And, thanx for the further info. Seems the FINAL settlement was not as outrageous as initially seen in the news.

"Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap."

A stupid move. She should have known that knees do not have the control to hold a bendable object like a styrofoam cup as hands do.

"McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees."

I don't have a thermometer, so IDK if my HOT coffee, which I am sipping right now is closer to 140 or 180, but I know when I microwave water at the same temp for tea, it is nearly boiling and reacts by bubbling with the tea bag.

"McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat."

Bullshit!

The coffee that I am SIPPING right now would burn the fuck out of my mouth and throat if I downed it like a soft drink. I do not drink hot coffee I sip it. It is cooler on the surface of the liquid than the liquid itself (hence, the little whisps of vapor coming off my 'steaming hot' coffee.)

"McDonalds also argued that consumers know coffee is hot and that its customers want it that way. The company admitted its customers were unaware that they could suffer thirddegree burns from the coffee ..."

I must be a fucking genius because I know that hot coffee will scald you. I am taking that risk at this very moment, hoping that the coffee I am sipping somehow does not pour over my naked legs. (altho I apparently would be better off than if I were wearing sweatpants.)

"The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages. This amount was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found Liebeck 20 percent at fault in the spill. The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, which equals about two days of McDonalds' coffee sales. Post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the local Albuquerque McDonalds had dropped to 158 degrees fahrenheit.

The trial court subsequently reduced the punitive award to $480,000 -- or three times compensatory damages -- even though the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous and willful.

No one will ever know the final ending to this case.

The parties eventually entered into a secret settlement which has never been revealed to the public, ..."

That sounds more reasonable.

Now, wonder how the woman with the burnt ass will do. Does her stupid ass even have a case. I think she is 100% at fault for sitting on any surface that has been baking in the southern sun. Or, should ppl sue Ford & Chevy in the summer when they sit their wet bare legs on a front car seat that has had the sun on it. I used to keep a towel in the car just for that reason. But we've just determined that I am a fucking genius.

It never fails.

Al, thanks for posting that full story. It was an interesting read. I am wondering if any of the other burn victims were ever compensated. If their reports were on file, I think they should have been contacted and given a settlement too, since this lady got one.

I still don't agree with her being awarded anything over her medical expenses. I think that would be plenty. She was at fault for placing the cup between her knees.

Ridiculous!

Liebeck's story is one tried by the Public without all knowledge and tried in every law student and paralegal classroom where the real facts do come out. It is undeniable fact that McDonald's had many lawsuits due to their overly hot coffee when people were unfortunate enough to accidentally have spills prior to Liebeck case. The the original request from Liebeck's family was for medical expenses to treat her burns only but when expenses went beyond their cap because her burns were severe and further treatment was required which was verified by her doctors they refused to pay any amount over their proscribed allowance. I knew someone who worked at McDonald's who had seen people get paid off just for a similiar coffee burning accident and was well aware of the cap. They were quietly paid off. It was then the lawyers and the Public got involved in the Liebeck case that the whole thing turned into a circus.

McDonald's had a field day vilifying this lady and her family and the Public ate it up like candy. Making them out to be greedy stupid opportunists out to bankrupt poor old Mickey D's. McDonald's made fools out of those who took their story at face value without bothering to look up the facts.

It is a case that will be argued forever more. Unfortunately, it will not be argued on the facts but on emotions, hearsay and opinion while this family takes the brunt of the foolishness that never should have happened in the first place.

Regarding the lady who sat on the hot seat. She is suing for something over which she did have control. Apples and oranges.