Looks like we’ve got a sequel to the [allegedly frivolous, but actually not] McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit:
This one seems substantially more frivolous than the original.
That was my original reaction, but IIRC the coffee in the coffee case was hotter than a reasonable person would have expected it to be.
In this case, the McNugget cause second degree burns to the child’s leg. That is hotter than I would have expected it to be.
Yup
Based on 30s of google as little 131 degrees can cause that kind of burn in under 20 seconds of contact.
If it really was 160 as defense claims, it could do it pretty quick. 160 doesn’t seem unexpectedly hot.
I feel like 160 may even be the health department minimum for chicken
1 Like
With the coffee 30 years ago, McDonald’s had internally set a standard of “coffee needs to be HOT when they arrive at their office after picking up in the drive thru” but gave no warning that it was hotter than ~normal ready to drink temperature
Also I am not a physicist, but I’m thinking for a water-based liquid to cause skin graft-necessary burns, it needs to be insanely hot, because the time at that temp when it’s spread out in your lap is so short. Unlike burning your feet on the concrete, where it’s just staying that temp forever for all intents and purposes
FDA says 165 minimum internal temp for food safety. The article I read says the family argued the nugget was over 200 degrees (seems unlikely to me, but most fryers run at about 350, so I guess it’s possible if you got a really fresh batch), McDonald’s said it was no more than 160.
1 Like
But you should only cook your chicken to 155 or so (white meat) but it needs to stay at that temp for 50-60 seconds or something
You might consider pulling a chicken out of the oven at 155F to allow inertia to bring the temp up to 165F. That would be for a whole chicken. Smaller cuts need to go to 160F or so to allow them to get to a safe temp.
Also, I’d almost guarantee the McDonald’s guidelines/training are set to err on the side of overcooking vs undercooked. It’s not like they’re custom cooking/temping each nugget. They’re saying “keep the fryer set at X, timer runs for Y minutes after you drop the nuggets” And the guidelines are going to be set with more concern about food poisoning than burns.
This is all well and good, but the safe cooking temperature isn’t really related to the safe serving temperature.
And really I’m just playing Devil’s Advocate. Handing your small child hot food isn’t a great idea. I’m just not going to be quick to side with McDonald’s on just about anything.
1 Like
“She’s still going to McDonalds, she still asks to go to McDonald’s, she’s still driving through the drive-thru with her mom, getting chicken nuggets
it healed in 3 weeks, but maybe there’s still a mark there I guess, god lawyer assholes asking for 15 million but that’s how law goes. 800k probably still excessive for the annoying burn but whatever law gonna law. They still have to cook the thing and it’s still a lot of teenagers doing it. The girl obviously isn’t that bothered but if there’s a way to remove the mark and they wanna do that and mcdonalds could pay for that seems fine to me but we end up in court instead of logical sense too often.
Well, take your time then.
I’m not a fan of McDonald’s either, but this one seems a bit much.
Just reheated some leftover pizza. Took it straight out of the oven and hit it with the infrared thermometer. 160 degrees. It was very hot. Would have burned my fingers if I held on to it for even 10 secs. When I started chewing on it definitely wasn’t overly hot and I kind of wished that I heated it a bit longer.
Saw this tiktok about a real life ex con John Wick, as told by his lawyer. Five guys invade his house where him and his girlfriend are. He disarms one of them, then proceeds to kill four of them, with the fifth escaping.
The DA didn’t file murder/manslaughter charges but instead charged him with being illegally in possession of a firearm as a convicted felon. This even though the gun was brought into the house by the criminals.
Eventually the DA dismissed all the charges, but it’s a crazy story even if his lawyer was embellishing a bit.
did they kill his dog?
3 Likes
Merrick Garland’s Resume and Cover Letter when applying to a SCOTUS clerkship
https://www.reddit.com/gallery/156yoa5
Seems standard, imo.
I wonder if it was typical to list grades on your resume or that was just something he did.
Imagine having to send out resumes in the era of the typewriter.
It seems overkill to list them all individually - but maybe it was harder to get a transcript back then.
Listing GPA - 3.97 (23 A’s, 4 A-'s) is just dumb. If you got a 3.97, it’s pretty obvious you only got a few non-A’s, no need to give the break-down.
I also wonder if it used to be standard to put your marital status on your resume.