Suing the NCAA

[UCDaveD]

It was too hot, she won the suit and McDonald's changed their operations to prevent it from happening to you. You should thank her.

I don't drink coffee.

And all McDonald's changing their operations means is that they don't want every Forrest Gump who spills coffee on themselves taking a swing at them.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

IIRC on the McD's coffee lawsuit (it was ~20 years ago when the case was finally settled, after lengthy litigation) what hurt McDonald's most in their case was that there had been complaints about how hot they were keeping their coffee, in some part of the country a local health department issued a demand for their restaurants to keep coffee at a lower temperature only to have internal memos from McDonalds advising to maintain the higher temps.

The defense was able to demonstrate a willful act, not merely accidental negligence in the coffee being kept as hot as it was.

 

[noeynox]

Right, because spilling coffee on your lap is the same thing as unknowingly driving a car that bursts into flames when in a rear end collision.



So McDonals kept the coffee at ~180 and they ruled it should be kept cooler. However, you bought the coffee, you know its hot, and yet you still open it in a styrofoam cup on your lap, and to boot, you spill it all over yourself.

You going to sue someone if you're boiling water for pasta and you spill the pot on yourself? Sue the water company maybe? The company that made the pot?

No stupid, you sue the stove!!!!

 

[UConn5]

I don't think they would have much of a shot. The whole NCAA scheme is ultimately about voluntary membership and voluntary attendance by the students at member schools. In reality the NCAA is monopolistic and they are essentially exploiting unpaid employees who generate millions. If the day ever comes where these players are compensated for their play, they could get employee status and that would change things.

This isn't my area of expertise so others could differ, but I'd like to hear from other lawyers if they see a particular approach they think would be successful.

Edit: Forgot to address those criticizing the woman in the mcdonalds suit. I would echo the sentiments that you should probably watch the "Hot Coffee" documentary. Yes everyone knows that coffee is hot, but that isn't the point. When you go and buy coffee at other coffee shop there is an acceptable range of temperatures that people expect. If McDonalds had put "180 degree Coffee" on their menu and the woman had ordered it then it would be her fault. Coffee should never be hot enough to cause the burns that the woman suffered through. She also only asked for her medical expenses, the jury awarded her more because McDonalds had ignored past complaints and they wanted to punish McDonalds, which they deserved.