EvoN1020v Posted January 4, 2006 Author Share Posted January 4, 2006 I mildly disagree with jdurg for the misprint, because I know a popular case that was in 1991 (I think), and it was a legal act over an omit of printing. The famous Tim Hortons' case? You guys know anything about that? A male American was sipping a Tim Horton coffee and it [accidently] fell into his laps. The coffee was still really hot, and he decided to sue Tim Hortons company for 2 or 3 million of dollars. At that time, the coffee cups didn't have the warning comment, "It's very hot, please be careful". But I mildly agree with jdurg because the hot coffee caused an injury to the man or rather the public. But still, I think it was greedy of him to sue for million of dollars. He could in kindness warn Tim Horton's company in the protection of the people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woelen Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 The coffee was still really hot, and he decided to sue Tim Hortons company for 2 or 3 million of dollars. This is plain stupid, ridiculous and mad . Coffee has to be hot and drinking coffee is a highly risky undertaking and you know in advance. The only thing I can do if I read this is laugh . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted January 4, 2006 Share Posted January 4, 2006 thats almost as bad as the bags of nuts with the warning "CAUTION: This product may contain nuts."i have one of those bags framed on my wall. no i didn't take the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now