Author Topic: She's suing Starbucks over too much ice in her iced coffee. Will she win?  (Read 5418 times)

Allen Farlow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Age: 66
  • Location: USA
Yes, this woman is claiming Starbucks fills cups almost halfway with ice, so they can put less coffee in the cup. Ice costs less than coffee. Does she have a valid reason to sue Starbucks for $5 million?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/starbucks-sued-over-ice_us_5725fdeee4b0b49df6ab8f75?

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2136
  • Location: Cleveland
My wife told me about this over the weekend, and my summary was basically, "She's suing because the default recipe isn't to her personal preference? Why doesn't she just ask for less ice?"

I don't think she has a leg to stand on, especially since they have everything completely standardized across the entire chain. They use measuring cups to scoop the damn ice.

Allen Farlow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Age: 66
  • Location: USA
I'd love to say she doesn't have a case but then there was that old woman who dropped her hot coffee in her lap at the McDonald's drive thru and ended up a millionaire... lawyers will figure out how to turn this 'ice' case into a big deal and some crazy judge will probably see their point. I wouldn't be surprised.

Cassie

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7031
Stupid. I hope it gets thrown out of court.

forummm

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7379
  • Senior Mustachian
I'd love to say she doesn't have a case but then there was that old woman who dropped her hot coffee in her lap at the McDonald's drive thru and ended up a millionaire... lawyers will figure out how to turn this 'ice' case into a big deal and some crazy judge will probably see their point. I wouldn't be surprised.
That case is commonly misconstrued
https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8197
  • Location: United States
I'd love to say she doesn't have a case but then there was that old woman who dropped her hot coffee in her lap at the McDonald's drive thru and ended up a millionaire... lawyers will figure out how to turn this 'ice' case into a big deal and some crazy judge will probably see their point. I wouldn't be surprised.

Have you actually read the documentation around that case?
Hot coffee should not cause third degree burns. 
Most coffee is served 30-40 degrees lower than what McDonald's was selling theirs at.

Also, she tried to settle the case for the cost of her medical bills and McDonald's wouldn't- it was the trial that added the punitive damages.

bobechs

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1067
I'd love to say she doesn't have a case but then there was that old woman who dropped her hot coffee in her lap at the McDonald's drive thru and ended up a millionaire... lawyers will figure out how to turn this 'ice' case into a big deal and some crazy judge will probably see their point. I wouldn't be surprised.

I can see you suffer from knowledge-opinion inversion syndrome, so this probably is wasted advice but here goes: 

Google is your friend.

Allen Farlow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Age: 66
  • Location: USA
Oh, okay. This thread is about the McDonald's coffee case now. My mistake...

Yes, McDonald's lost that case because of their negligence (serving coffee hotter than necessary and failing to properly warn customers). I get that. But you've got to admit a sane person would know better than to place a cup of coffee, deliberately served hot, between their legs and THEN remove the lid, causing the top of the cup to no longer resist the squeezing force applied by her legs. Good grief. What was her IQ? 40? I'm sorry she was burned and sorry that they chose McDonald's. (Ew.)

Now let's get back on topic - Starbucks being sued for putting too much ice in their iced coffee. Does she have a case?

zephyr911

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3620
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Northern Alabama
  • I'm just happy to be here. \m/ ^_^ \m/
    • Pinhook Development LLC
Only if every bar everywhere is also cheating customers.
This is the dumbest suit I've heard about in weeks, and she needs a facepunch.

deadlymonkey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 400
She was found partially at fault in the Mcdonald's case.  In that case the jury found McDonalds has a causal disregard for the safety of their product by ignoring hundreds of other coffee related injuries.


Back to the Starbucks case, no she doesn't have a case.  Ice is a presumed ingredient in Iced drinks.  Furthermore, Starbucks will modify the recipe per your request at no charge.  If she wants an iced Coffee without ice, they will make that.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 18829
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
But you've got to admit a sane person would know better than to place a cup of coffee, deliberately served hot, between their legs and THEN remove the lid, causing the top of the cup to no longer resist the squeezing force applied by her legs. Good grief. What was her IQ? 40? I'm sorry she was burned and sorry that they chose McDonald's. (Ew.)

What you're describing isn't what happened.  She didn't squeeze it between her legs and some dribbled out.  McDonalds had more than 700 other cases of people being injured because of the temperature that they were serving coffee.

I enjoy hot coffee, and on occasion have spilled it on myself after making some.  It happens.  Even when your IQ is above 40.  It certainly shouldn't require skin grafts afterwards.

Allen Farlow

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 44
  • Age: 66
  • Location: USA
Right, GuitarStv, she wasn't squeezing it with her legs: 'She had the cup between her knees while removing the lid to add cream and sugar when the cup tipped over and spilled the entire contents on her lap.' https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts

Gee, why did the cup tip over? Maybe because the seat wasn't a solid, flat surface?

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8197
  • Location: United States
Right, GuitarStv, she wasn't squeezing it with her legs: 'She had the cup between her knees while removing the lid to add cream and sugar when the cup tipped over and spilled the entire contents on her lap.' https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts

Gee, why did the cup tip over? Maybe because the seat wasn't a solid, flat surface?

And that's why the jury found her to be 20% at fault.

I have spilled hot coffee on myself many times. I have never suffered 3rd degree burns.  McDonalds was partially at fault.

Gin1984

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4877
I'd love to say she doesn't have a case but then there was that old woman who dropped her hot coffee in her lap at the McDonald's drive thru and ended up a millionaire... lawyers will figure out how to turn this 'ice' case into a big deal and some crazy judge will probably see their point. I wouldn't be surprised.
Except in the hot coffee case McDonald's had been told to decrease the temperature to "safe" levels and did not.  And the woman got third degree burns because McDonald's did not adhere to the safe standard.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5279
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
I'd love to say she doesn't have a case but then there was that old woman who dropped her hot coffee in her lap at the McDonald's drive thru and ended up a millionaire... lawyers will figure out how to turn this 'ice' case into a big deal and some crazy judge will probably see their point. I wouldn't be surprised.
Except in the hot coffee case McDonald's had been told to decrease the temperature to "safe" levels and did not.  And the woman got third degree burns because McDonald's did not adhere to the safe standard.

So many people obviously have never dealt with 3rd degree burns... They clearly have no concept of the level of tissue damage involved. This is why the lady was awarded money - the jury had the facts, and not just the "Woman spills coffee, sues MickyDees" headlines.

LeRainDrop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1834
My wife told me about this over the weekend, and my summary was basically, "She's suing because the default recipe isn't to her personal preference? Why doesn't she just ask for less ice?"

I don't think she has a leg to stand on, especially since they have everything completely standardized across the entire chain. They use measuring cups to scoop the damn ice.

I agree.  The Starbucks plaintiff has no *grounds* for her claim -- pun intended!

JZinCO

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 701
My wife told me about this over the weekend, and my summary was basically, "She's suing because the default recipe isn't to her personal preference? Why doesn't she just ask for less ice?"

I don't think she has a leg to stand on, especially since they have everything completely standardized across the entire chain. They use measuring cups to scoop the damn ice.

I agree.  The Starbucks plaintiff has no *grounds* for her claim -- pun intended!
I don't get it. I'll give it some time to percolate

bobechs

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1067
I'd love to say she doesn't have a case but then there was that old woman who dropped her hot coffee in her lap at the McDonald's drive thru and ended up a millionaire... lawyers will figure out how to turn this 'ice' case into a big deal and some crazy judge will probably see their point. I wouldn't be surprised.
Except in the hot coffee case McDonald's had been told to decrease the temperature to "safe" levels and did not.  And the woman got third degree burns because McDonald's did not adhere to the safe standard.

So many people obviously have never dealt with 3rd degree burns... They clearly have no concept of the level of tissue damage involved. This is why the lady was awarded money - the jury had the facts, and not just the "Woman spills coffee, sues MickyDees" headlines.

And then the appellate courts took (virtually) all the damages award away, which is an important part of the well-known story and an important part of why the OP's ignorant rage against that plaintiff is so... ignorant.

The only obvious parallel between the McDonalds case and the Starbucks case is the word 'coffee' which is pretty weak stuff. -No pun-

The Starbucks case is almost certainly a class action -that's where the pled damages lie, not in cheating one person (if cheating there was)- and based upon a theory of fraud upon a large group of consumers, not personal injury negligence.   Legally speaking they could hardly be farther apart.

Now, there is a lot to be said both for and against consumer class action cases against companies.  At best, they are the only effective remedy for a company cheating a large number of people out of a small amount of money each; which then falls below the practical limit for legal action.  At worst, they are an affront to all that is holy and good in the Tea Party way of the world.

In between, they are problematic because they may represent a kind of lawyers' rent-seeking by filing and then settling this type of case for merely nominal amounts (but plus pretty large legal fees) or sometimes in addition a kind of whitemail where companies connive with the other side in reaching a settlement that cuts off substantial liability by settling the class claim cheap (except for the pay-off to the plaintiffs' lawyers.)

But why get in to all of that?  It takes thought, and it is so much more fun to just hate on the plaintiff and all the crazeee judges out there.

Tyson

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2516
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Denver, Colorado
Hey, can't we just vote with our wallets?  /snark.

Yaeger

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 758
  • Age: 39
It's a Huffington Post article about ice in iced coffee. It's not even in the realm of possibility to be considered as serious, yet these things seem to needlessly turn into heated and strong debates. Good luck to her, but I hope she doesn't waste too many public resources trying to push this frivolous suit.

meep

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Ask for no ice? I do that for soda so I get more to drink. Unless there's more to the case than I understand why couldn't they just say "less/no ice" along with the 39 other instructions given to customize the coffee experience.