|
|
|
|
|
by deckeraa
1455 days ago
|
|
In that case Kuerig's legal argument would be straightforward: - The injury due to the coffee burn was due entirely to the elevated temperature. - The machine would not have served at the scalding temperature had McDonald's not made the modification. - The modification was specifically made to raise the temperature to a level that turned out to be unsafe. The question of whether a modification was made would almost certainly come out in court because a McDonald's employee would be unlikely to perjure themselves over it. Therefore, all the liability would be on McDonald's. Though I do see your point about legal costs being incurred even if the case of Kuering being completely innocent. It seems that having a culture instilled with a nebulous concept of "liability" encourages people to limit other's ability to take their own risks. (Edit: formatting) |
|
There doesn’t need to be “walk don’t run” signs everywhere, and liability waivers for every activity.