If you step into this Whataburger in Kilgore, Texas, you automatically agree to the burger joint’s mandatory arbitration clause. At least that’s what the sign on the door says. According to Mother Jones:
Sorey says when he went in, he told a befuddled cashier that he didn’t think that the arbitration notice was enforceable, that anyway he wasn’t agreeing to it, and, “I need a taquito and a coffee.” He says he sat down, watched some traffic, and ate his taquito. “I didn’t choke, I didn’t burn myself, and I didn’t sue ‘em,” he reports.
That’s one burger that’s hard to swallow. Might choke on your after you read this sign. That’s one raw burger. Etc.
Eat Burger, Waive Right to Sue [Mother Jones]
(Photo: Dan Sorey)
More From Consumerist
-
Video Game Publisher/Seller Valve Now Forcing Customers Into Mandatory Binding Arbitration
-
Now You Can No Longer File Class-Action Suits Against StubHub; Here’s How To Opt Out
-
eBay Users Have Until Nov. 9 To Opt Out Of Mandatory Binding Arbitration
-
Reminder: Write eBay By Nov. 9 To Opt Out Of Restrictive, Anti-Consumer Clause
-
Here Is A Downloadable Template For Opting Out Of PayPal Arbitration Clause
@Buran: How about if we add on that the car was parked at the time?
@csdiego: I can’t tell who you meant to reply to. Did you mean to reply to anyone?
@Buran: Are you sure? What if instead of it spilling on her leg she’d sipped it instead? The resulting burns to her mouth would have occurred no matter where she was at or what else she was doing.
Hah hah by entering this building you are agreeing to accept crappy service and the occasional roach in your burger. If maggots are found you must submit to arbitration to discuss how much extra protein you have ingested.
Based on the percentage of Extra Protein you have ingested you will recieve a gift certificate equal to one dollar for each ouch of Extra protein consumed.
I had the place once and it was enough for me to never go back…. they suck.
@camille_javal:
While I cannot vouch for the one in twenty-four million number, I will say that Liebeck undeniably shares a portion of responsibility. If you read the Stella Awards page, you would realize that:
1. She was not driving
2. She put the coffee between her legs
3. She burned herself immediately after opening the lid
4. 190 Degrees is the recommended temperature for coffee to be served in order to be palatable, yes that’s hot
5. I don’t drink coffee but I know well enough that coffee is usually on the scalding hot side (common sense)
I agree with you that McDonald’s could have avoided the entire gaff by simply paying the medical bills in the first place. I have no problem with that. However, asking for millions of dollars (which was later reduced to a less ridiculous amount) for burning yourself is morally (and legally) questionable.
As for the actual arbitration sign at this Whataburger, all I have to say is WhataTF.
You know, we should just do away with the whole civil justice system. It would be so much easier for business owners to do whatever they want without any pesky repercussions…
@PlanetExpressdelivery:
Here we go again with the misinformation!
McDonald’s flacks have done an excellent job of spreading the bullshit around!
1. McDonald’s own consultants had told them the coffee was too hot.
2. McDonald’s had already settled at least 200 too hot coffee lawsuits.
3. McDonald’s had approximately 750 more lawsuits awaiting trial over the coffee temperature.
4. Why was it so hot?
Because McDonald’s insisted that the coffee would have gotten cold by the time it got to the place where the people were going to drink it.
Stella Liebeck’s only part of contributory negligence was putting it between her legs.
But, if the coffee hadn’t been so damn hot, nothing would have happened when it spilled.
I like my coffee cold I dont understand the whole hot thing.
The lady who spilled the coffee on herself only has herself to blame. Drinking a very hot liquid in a confined space that constricts your movements makes things all the more perilous.
However, I think anyone who drinks coffee has a reasonable expectation that the liquid is hot and scalding.
I feel sorry for the poor lady, but I can’t agree that McDonalds should be made to pay up. People need to exercise self-responsibility – something that is lacking in this world.
@Greasy Thumb Guzik:
4. Why was it so hot?
Because McDonald’s insisted that the coffee would have gotten cold by the time it got to the place where the people were going to drink it.
Yes, imagine people actually wanting to drink hot coffee when they get to work, imagine that?
On the burger EULA:
Maybe they will add another section that displays a non-compete agreement: you may not eat at a competing fast food chain for 90 days
IAAL (I am a lawyer) and it depends on the state in which this restaurant resides (Texas?) but simply walking through a door is not a binding contractual agreement.
DMDDALLAS, coffee is supposed to be “hot” (a relative description) but it is not supposed to be “scalding” (to cause burns). One can not drink “scalding” coffee. In the infamous case the coffee caused third degree burns. Do a Google image search for “third degree burns” and you’ll understand how hot the coffee was. It was pure negligence on the part of McDonalds to serve what was supposed to be a drink at a temperature that would cause those burns.
@Rectilinear Propagation: I was responding to mrmysterious, then I made a general comment on the whole situation.
Maybe I’m just feeling a bit feisty today after that 5th mocha but I’d love to walk in, drop my pants and squeeze out the biggest turd I could on the floor. Than pull up my pants, point at said turd and say “arbitrate this” as I walk out the door.
Assclown.
@DMDDallas: Would it have been ANY different if she had been sitting at a table and the coffee was spilled into her lap?
-For the record, she was found 20% at fault, because she had placed it between her legs.
-The punitive damages of $2.7 million were TWO days of coffee sales for McDonald’s, and that was how they arrived at that figure.
-The coffee was being served between 20-40 degrees higher than other restaurants. And while coffee is meant to be BREWED at that temperature, is is NEVER meant to be be consumed at that temperature.
-And let’s be honest, he vast majority of people do not wait to get to work before consuming the drink.
dang, and i thought they told me in school that water boils at 230 degrees
The legal issue that Whataburger will have difficulty with is “consent”. In order for an arbitration agreement to be valid, a judge must find that both parties agreed to binding arbitration.
@Roguesopist: Unconscionability is not a bar to forming a contract but rather a means to void a contract. If neither party to an arbitration agreement raises unconscionability as grounds for not enforcing it, then the contract will continue on.
Ha! Ha! This is so unenforceable.
These sort of “contracts” don’t actually hold up in court. Also, the contracts you sign when you start a job that says you can never sue your employer for wrongful termination etc are equally BS[www.nashuatelegraph.com] They are designed to scare people off and avoid litigation in the first place, but are not legal contracts under the eyes of the law. Point being, you cannot sign your right to a valid lawsuit away.
@Ben Popken:
Correct: People tend to forget that the woman that spilled coffee on herself was content with a lower amount for time missed from work. McDonald’s blew her off and paid the price for not only serving such hot coffee but for laughing in her face. McDonald’s could have saved themselves from negative PR and from being the subject of an almost mythical, trend-setting (I remember going into restaurants afterwards and seeing signs saying “We serve hot coffee, use caution”, etc. keep in mind this is before you even entered the damn restarant) and infamous lawsuit . But then again, they’ve never been concerned about negative PR anyways.
@kamikasee:
lol. Being from south texas I was thinking the same myself. Too bad it’s something as eye-roll inducing as this. But I guess it’s the sign of the times. Whataburger has to protect themselves from billy-bob and cora bonewall from poth, TX walking in, slipping on a damp spot on the floor then screaming bloody murder about how a disc in their back popped out then winning a “shut up and go away” settlement that will just be spent on scratch off lotto tickets and time life music collections.
@outphase: Plenty of BS cases go to trial. And it doesn’t matter if the car was parked or not, SHE PUT IT BETWEEN HER LEGS, and we expect people to handwave and say that’s OK? How fucking stupid do you have to be to put hot stuff in a place like that? You GET OUT OF THE GODDAMN CAR AND PUT IT ON A TABLE.
My god, people really have no sense of personal responsibility or common sense anymore!
there really needs to be a “mcdonald’s lady” corollary to godwin’s law.
I would be seriously tempted, if I saw such a piece of paper taped to the door of a local restaurant, to reach inside and grab it (without entering), pull out a pen, line out & initial the binding arbitration clause, sign it, then enter and present it to the cashier with my order. It’s technically not vandalism, since they presented a contract to me, which entitles me to reject, accept, or modify it and return it to them for their approval.
@Difdi:
Interesting point, considering the nature of express contracts is some aspect of negotiation, you could certainly say that they consented to such an action. Moreover, it also implicates when a parol contract was made and what for (what is the obligation of the joint?)
A parol contract is defined to be a bargain or voluntary agreement made, either orally or in writing not under seal, upon a good consideration, between two or more persons capable of contracting, to do a lawful act or to omit to do something, the performance whereof is not enjoined by law.
From this definition it appears, that to constitute a sufficient parol agreement, there must be:
1st. The reciprocal or mutual assent of two or more persons competent to contract. Every agreement ought to be so certain and complete, that each party may have an action upon it; and the agreement would be incomplete if either party withheld his assent to any of its terms. The agreement must, in general, be obligatory on both parties, or it binds neither. To this rule there are, however, some exceptions, as in the case of an infant’s contract. He may always sue, though he cannot be sued on his contract.
2d. There must be a good and valid consideration, motive or inducement to make the promise upon which a party is charged, for this is of the very essence of a contract under seal and must exist, although the contract be reduced to writing.
3d. There must be a thing to be done, which is not forbidden; or a thing to be omitted, the performance of which is not enjoined by law. A fraudulent or immoral contract, or one contrary to public policy is void.
Also for those “hot coffee” comments -
Water boils at 212 °F or 100 °C
McDonalds required that the franchises served their coffee at 180-190 °F (82-88 °C)
The National Coffee Association instructs that coffee be brewed “between 195-205 degrees Fahrenheit [91-96 °C] for optimal extraction” and consumed “immediately”. If not consumed immediately, the coffee is to be “maintained at 180-185 degrees Fahrenheit.
McDonald’s quality control manager, Christopher Appleton, testified that this number of injuries was insufficient to cause the company to evaluate its practices. He argued that all foods hotter than 130 °F (54 °C) constituted a burn hazard, and that restaurants had more pressing dangers to warn about.
The Defense stated that lowering the temperature would have given more time to people spilled upon (Rejected later as scientifically suspect [www.bailii.org]).
Fun facts!!!