"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> Vox Humana wrote:
>
> > But it could have spilled inside, at a table, with the same
consequences.
>
> I suppose that it could have spilled inside, but I doubt that she would
have
> received a serious injury in a delicate spot of her body. Holding it
between
> her legs presented the possibility of the contents dumping right into her
> crotch. Unfortunately, that is what happened.
>
> > Does that make it OK to serve dangerously hot coffee? I guess that you
are
> > focused on the fact that she did something unconventional, and I am
focused
> > on the fact that the coffee was dangerously hot.
>
> ALL hot coffee is dangerously hot. It's hot. It can scald / burn. People
> ordering coffee know it's hot. We get our coffee and we test it for heat
before
> we gulp it down. It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that coffee is hot.
The
> degree of heat varies.

Hot and dangerously hot are not the same. The plaintiff established that
other restaurants served their coffee at lower (safer) temperatures. I think
the fact that she sustained such sever burns shows that the coffee was far
too hot. Even the whiteness for McDonalds testified that the coffee was
unfit to drink as dispensed.