[SolaceQuantum]

I believe if you are recieved dangerously hot beverages(that could melt your skin) where there is no context to expect the beverage could harm you, and are injured from it, then it shouldn’t be your fault. If I ask for a glass of water from a restaurant, should I handle the glass of water as if it could give me frostbite? What if they handed me super cooled water that damaged my hand as I accidentally touched the surface as I ate food? How can it be my fault when there is no reasonable danger to be aware of?

[JoeAltmaier]

Again, not the case in this particular instance. And further, the cup was very hot, and the lid secure. Those straw men are irrelevant - it wasn't by touching the cup that the litigant was injured. It was willfully removing the top.

[SolaceQuantum]

How would she be at fault if there is no indication that willfully removing the top would expose liquids so hot that it would melt her skin? There is no reasonable expectation to be served coffee that will melt your skin when exposed to it.

[nate_meurer]

I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think you understand the temperatures involved here. Stella was burned by 80 deg C coffee. Guess who else serves coffee this hot? Everybody. ALL good coffee shops and restaurants serve coffee in the range of 160 degrees F (71.1 degrees C) and 185 degrees F (85 degrees C). The National Coffee Association informally recommends the higher end of this range, around 80-85 deg C, and McDonalds still serves at this temperature or higher.

Anyone who drinks coffee at shops or restaurants, or makes coffee in a decent coffee maker, has experience with 80+ deg C coffee, and any reasonable person should know not to squeeze a cup of it between their legs while they take the top off, which is what Stella did.