Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

28 posts in this topic

Posted

A gospel singer is suing McDonald

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

So we wait for 3 years before we decide to sue.... How are you going to prove the glass shard came from a McD's sandwich after waiting so long.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Err... why did she wait 3 and a half years? I think that will severely hurt her case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I guess McDonald's is at fault. But then again, they mass produce their food and I'm pretty sure there are factory quality standards that allow a certain percentage of this kind of stuff through. That's the reasion you can get a dead rodent or other, non-edible stuff in canned foods. As long as McDonald's passed the standards like that, I don't know if they can guilty.

Obviously, if this was a regular restaurant that made food to order, it would totally be their fault. But this whole factory produced food gray area throws me for a loop. I would assume this woman and her lawyers would have to prove the glass was the direct reason why her voice got worse. If so, they might have a case.

I mean, we are talking about the broken legal system that awarded a plaintiff a ton of money because McDonald's served a regular (hot) coffee that they spilled and burned themselves...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I mean, we are talking about the broken legal system that awarded a plaintiff a ton of money because McDonald's served a regular (hot) coffee that they spilled and burned themselves...

That is not true. That case involved coffee so hot it caused 3rd degree burns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I don't remember ever seeing anything served in glass at McDonald's.

Would have to come from a broken window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I don't remember ever seeing anything served in glass at McDonald's.

Would have to come from a broken window.

It could come from multiple manufacturing processes, or even from another supplier....

Things fall into mixers, bags and such all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Umm.. Biology fail? The larynx is in the trachea, not the esophagus. She would have had to have inhaled the glass, not swallowed it...

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I guess McDonald's is at fault. But then again, they mass produce their food and I'm pretty sure there are factory quality standards that allow a certain percentage of this kind of stuff through. That's the reasion you can get a dead rodent or other, non-edible stuff in canned foods. As long as McDonald's passed the standards like that, I don't know if they can guilty.

Obviously, if this was a regular restaurant that made food to order, it would totally be their fault. But this whole factory produced food gray area throws me for a loop. I would assume this woman and her lawyers would have to prove the glass was the direct reason why her voice got worse. If so, they might have a case.

I mean, we are talking about the broken legal system that awarded a plaintiff a ton of money because McDonald's served a regular (hot) coffee that they spilled and burned themselves...

I'm pretty sure glass shards and dead rodents fall outside of any food safety standards .... I don't know what country you live in, but a dead rodent inside of a can would warrent an immediate shutdown, recall and health inspection in mine.

That said, I always get suspicious when I hear someone waited a large amount of time before suing. Why didn't she sue immediately after ingesting the glass, and how could she know it was glass anyway when she swallowed it, did she throw up after in the mcdo and found a piece of glass? In that case, settle immediatly, do not wait three years :s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I guess McDonald's is at fault. But then again, they mass produce their food and I'm pretty sure there are factory quality standards that allow a certain percentage of this kind of stuff through...

Actually it would probably be the food distributor or mfg that is at fault. The problem here is you have to show some type of negligence on the part of McDonalds or whoever is ultimately going to be at fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Not really sure why she is suing McDonald's, shouldn't she sue the supplier of the McChicken patties?

Also, doesn't she chew? I seem to be able to detect the smallest grain of damn sand in anything I eat, and when I do, I get rid of it, I don't swallow the sand

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'm pretty sure glass shards and dead rodents fall outside of any food safety standards .... I don't know what country you live in, but a dead rodent inside of a can would warrent an immediate shutdown, recall and health inspection in mine.

Welcome to the internet, everyone here is an expert. So you'll see comments like the one you were responding to. And yes of course there is no "allowed" limit of GLASS in peoples food... Good way to ruin your rep and lose all of your customers. The competition would just have to advertise "We allow 0% glass in our food"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Umm.. Biology fail? The larynx is in the trachea, not the esophagus. She would have had to have inhaled the glass, not swallowed it...

Yeah, her vocal chords are in her larynx. Either she inhaled a shard of glass and choked or the shard of glass cut through thick muscle tissue to get from her esophagus to her larynx. Neither scenarios seem plausible because the former would have been an immediate issue and the latter is highly improbable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It could come from multiple manufacturing processes, or even from another supplier....

Things fall into mixers, bags and such all the time.

Which is why McDonald's should win the lawsuit.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That is not true. That case involved coffee so hot it caused 3rd degree burns.

I guess you're another person similar to the one in the lawsuit that doesn't realize coffee is made with boiling water.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

How are they going to prove that it was mcdonalds fault after 3 years? do they have video proof with time she was a t mcdonalds and then at the doctors the next day? IF they do not how do they think they will win?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

^ Lawyers can create facts where there are none. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I guess you're another person similar to the one in the lawsuit that doesn't realize coffee is made with boiling water.

How it's made is irrelevant. My coffee isn't boiled for one. Two, what matters is how you serve it. You can't possibly have a single legitimate reason for severing boiling water to drink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

^ The idea on McDonald's part, was so the commuting customers would have reasonably warm coffee when they got to work.

Not saying they did the right thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

^ The idea on McDonald's part, was so the commuting customers would have reasonably warm coffee when they got to work.

Not saying they did the right thing.

They serve their food/drinks for immediate consumption.Thats a basic fact of fast food. Maybe they should start serving their fries in containers that still have boiling oil in them so people can eat them later?
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

^ Many ppl in the mornings are on the way to work -- they buy coffee -- they are trying to accommodate them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Sounds to me that she got old, her voice changed, and God did nothing about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

They serve their food/drinks for immediate consumption.Thats a basic fact of fast food. Maybe they should start serving their fries in containers that still have boiling oil in them so people can eat them later?

I'm sorry, but hot drinks like tea and coffee are generally made with boiling water. This is how it is. It's why kettles click off as the water comes to the boil. If you're stupid enough to just gulp down a drink labelled as a hot drink (not warm drink) without sipping to test it, then nobody is at fault but yourself.

Also the comment about food, it is NOT unusual for restaurants to serve food that is literally sizzling. It's common (is it really that common any more?) sense that you wait for it to cool before consuming it. Seriously, nobody takes responsibility for their own actions anymore, it's always somebody elses fault. Sue!

That said, glass in your burger is entirely different. She has grounds to sue for that, though waiting for 3+ years is questionable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I guess you're another person similar to the one in the lawsuit that doesn't realize coffee is made with boiling water.

And you would be wrong, water boils at 212 degrees. In most states, law dictates that coffee shouldn't be brewed over 205 degrees, depending on the state of course. https://legacy.daydo...32&ArticleID=14

I'm sorry, but hot drinks like tea and coffee are generally made with boiling water. This is how it is. It's why kettles click off as the water comes to the boil. If you're stupid enough to just gulp down a drink labelled as a hot drink (not warm drink) without sipping to test it, then nobody is at fault but yourself.

Also the comment about food, it is NOT unusual for restaurants to serve food that is literally sizzling. It's common (is it really that common any more?) sense that you wait for it to cool before consuming it. Seriously, nobody takes responsibility for their own actions anymore, it's always somebody elses fault. Sue!

That said, glass in your burger is entirely different. She has grounds to sue for that, though waiting for 3+ years is questionable.

You would be wrong too. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Err... why did she wait 3 and a half years? I think that will severely hurt her case.

The singer, who is also a clerk with the Attorney General

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.