Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
83-Year Old Suing Apple After Walking into Glass Doors at Retail Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Glass doors are very, very common in the retail world. Where do you live that they are not?
Her vision issues don't make the store liable. How about she get a properly measured set of spectacles.
If it has happened more than once, there's more wrong here than just vision.
The link you reference here: http://i.imgur.com/H93fR.gif clearly shows someone in a hurry and not at all paying attention to where they are walking. Not the stores fault.
You mean like six years ago? I'd wager there are no five year olds here hehe
Some of the comments on MacRumours seem like they come from five-year olds, however.
But my point was about whether these immature posters joined MacRumours after buying an Itoy, without realizing that in the past Apple was a computer company. That has nothing to do with the chronological age of the member.
I don't see hatred, I see people wanting others to be more responsible for themselves and stop blaming others. I'm sorry, she's old, not as perceptive, likely needs glasses or a new exam for some. Walking into a glass wall is her fault not Apple's.
It likely wouldn't stay that hot, but just last week I was served some extremely good fatitas on a iron skillet that was very very hot and also some Lobster Mac and Cheese that was beyond hot. If I spilled it in my lap or knocked the skilllet on my leg I wouldn't sue the restaurant.
The McD coffee story is old school BS. IMO she should have lost the suit. I have no sympathy for an idiot who takes coffee right from the drive through and spills it in their lap.
No.
1. The lady sued for just her damages in that one. The reason she got more was the jury felt McDonald's needed punitive damages. But she wasn't trying to make money off of McD's, she just wanted her medical bills paid. This was not a case of some one just trying to make money.
2. This was not the first time McD's had gotten in trouble for coffee so hot it caused *3rd degree burns* (We're not talking about a ow, that's hot. We're talking about hot enough to burn the skin off of you).
3. Coffee that causes 3rd degree burns (not even to the mouth which is more sensitive but on just tougher skin), is not fit to drink! They are selling something that is supposedly fit to drink
Now, I'm all for getting outraged at ridiculous sue cases (like the drunk idiot who hit a boar while riding his motorcycle and sued cause they didn't put a boar crossing sign - gee, you are supposed to be on the lookout for wild animals crossing the road period and you were drunk too so who is to say it wasn't the fact you weren't fit to ride is the problem, wild animals happen. Or the thief who sued and won cause the dog in the house bit him).
And I used to use that one as my prime example. But honestly, once some one pointed out the facts, I don't think it's such a blatant example.
Oh, for the people pointing out how fast she must have been walking, she's an 80 year old woman. Sorry, you get old, you break easily.
Not to say I think she should win. Just saying that the reason she broke her nose was probably more cause she was fragile rather than going fast (in fact, for most of us we'd probably be like that guy some one saw who ran into the door and his friend got a laugh. If she were younger, it probably would have resulted the same as that).
And I'm honestly not sure if she should win (I'd have to see the door she ran into honestly and what it was marked with), but I am sure she shouldn't get more than just her medical bills covered if she does win.
Though to be honest I've never had an issue figuring out whether the doors are open or closed at my closest Apple store. And I can be the kind that's walking so fast that if everything doesn't go to plan I end up crashing in the door (like managing to miss the handle when I reach for it that I run into the door cause it didn't open when I expected to have it open by, but I'm a clutz
1. The coffee caused her third degree burns because she was wearing sweatpants and the liquid stayed on her skin longer enough to produce them. So McDonalds was to blame for that?
Last edited:
No, they were not liable for the spill, they were liable for the extremely high temperatures that the coffee was kept at (higher than other sellers) so that it would cause third degree burns in seconds over 6 percent of her body.
Read the darned case. The plaintiff was found partially liable, but McDonalds was found 80% liable since they were informed several times by customers (over 700 times) that their coffee was being served at excessive temps and their reason for serving at such excessive temperatures was contradicted by their own research and they also have had problems with people suffering burns from their coffee before and made no changes to their procedures.
That added up to negligence which is what was being ruled on.
Walking around without proper eyewear(i.e. glasses) to see properly enough to avoid walking into glass surely will be enough common sense for this case to be thrown out or not it far.
I only hope Apple fights tooth and nail against this and not settling out of court at all
Next will be the person suing cause they walked into a standard Grey parking meter cause it matched with the grey street behind it
----------
I only hope Apple fights tooth and nail against this and not settling out of court at all
Next will be the person suing cause they walked into a standard Grey parking meter cause it matched with the grey street behind it
----------
I won't go into the systematic genocide and stealing of land from the indigenous people (that were their own nation) OR how the US supreme court said it was ok to steal the land because they (the Indians) were not destroying the environment to exploiting the land..... I will simply educate you that capitalism relies on 3 major factors. 1. People are competative 2. People are driven to obtain personal possessions and wealth 3. People are self interested rather than collectively interested. (greedy)
I know Americans like to believe the victors version of how this country was founded but the reality (when you actually take the time to learn the true history of America) is not what you learned in school. This country was founded by murderous, lying, thieving slave owners and that didn't change when we declared our independence.
I can certainly give more detailed examples if you wish but you really should do that research on your own. Nothing like learning you were lied to your entire life.
She is complicit on the amount because she gave her attorney the green light to sue for that much. She could have easily said "no".
For god sakes.... How do you walk into the glass? She won't get $1m out of apple she might get 100,000 which is not going to bother them at all compared to the billions they have been making.
Just another lawsuit, The hangers on are Lways going to be there...Apple will probably settle this out of court.
That sounds pretty condescending... I know about these things. I was assuming that "founding" meant "the founding fathers", not the entire history of America.
May I point out that everywhere in the world was created through conquest and that America involved less conquest than most of the world? The Europeans killed off the Chinese-Americans (after thinking they were Indian), then some of the Americans fought a war with the British. I won't even go into Jerusalem, Asia Minor, France, Germany, Italy, and basically everywhere else. And keep in mind that the Middle East is still being fought for.
----------
Why not just not hire a lawyer? I'm pretty sure the judge will close the case:
1. Apple is a huge, influential company. Big companies tend to win lawsuits anyway (like how Tucker got killed by GM and Ford).
2. This is a ridiculous case brought up by an idiotic, greedy old bag.
I love this argument. It's so picky. Choosy.
Seriously. Name one country that wasn't founded at the expense of it's indigenous people. Name one European colony that hasn't done something terrible to said indigenous people. Hell. Look at Africa. Still suffering from colonization even centuries later. Australia: The Lost Generation. The list goes on.
Yet for some reason, everyone wants to focus on the US like it's the sole perpetrator of violence and strife in the world. Like it's some cancer upon the world, while everyone else is a tiny beacon of virtue in this American benighted world.
And no. I'm not excusing the atrocities that the US has committed in it's rather short past. Rather, I'm bitching because, good God, the whole AMERICA IS EVIL AND BLAH BLAH BLAH thing is so, so cliche these days. You can't even turn a corner on these wide internets without someone yakking their head off, sprouting off what's ultimately nothing more than an uneducated talking point because they think it makes them look smart and edgy.
Don't be that guy, man. Try harder.
Yes, exactly. Everyone blames all Americans for everything. America's past is much more peaceful than the rest of the world's.
Sorry but your view on our history doesn't represent the facts. Using the argument that they weren't as bad as others is laughable. Does it matter that you're family would of been killed worse under another group of people? Was it better that their land was taken by a LESS brutal occupier? LoL.... I bet the 4000 Cherokee that died on the Trail of Tears were thinking just that. (that happened in 1838 because President Jackson decided they needed to move off their gold rich land in Georgia so the state could have that money and land). I'm not judging the past by modern standards, I am judging them from a human, non animal, non American with blinders on standard.
I blamed America for it's past and nothing more.
I meant the early european settlers AND the established US government. Again you use the argument that those stated above were not as bad as others that did the same... My rebuttle remains the same.
I am stating the facts of our history. You choose to debate my facts with the argument that every nation came to be in such a manner. You are arguing a point I didn't even bring up or believe and you tell ME not to be that guy? YOU should try harder.
Read the thread and discover for yourself.
Because you must not have read the origin of this discussion and don't want to take the time to find out why, I'll tell you. A poster spoke of the good ol days in America when the people were not greedy and so forth but now it's so bad.... I simply educated him how greed has ALWAYS been a part of the American past. FaroZ06 asked me how this was the case, I offered proof of our history (that isn't in debate) and he and others including you brought us to the point we are now.
Guys, the facts of our history are just that.... facts. They are not in dispute, not up for debate they are however up for interpritation. It's like the difference between a battle and a massacre. The American government/people called the battle at Little Bighorn a Massacre yet called the killing of women and children at Sand Creek a battle. One was clearly a battle of 2 fighting forces and one was clearly a massacre of women and children. The facts are there for all to see yet the interpritation of those facts are different depending on who is doing the reporting. (heck, hitler denied the jewish holocost yet we had ELECTED officials/military men calling for (and carrying out) the genocide of Indian tribes yet we don't judge those elected officials/military men as harshly as we do hitler. Why is that?)
I see no need to further this as it has gotten way off the OP's point. I do however ask all to learn the FACTS of our history and not the story you were taught in school.
Last edited:
WhoAmI2 said:
You know the Mongols killed roughly 50,000,000 people under Attila The Hun, right? I can't let a day slide by that I don't bring up that atrocity.
What about England. Yeah. They were pretty much monsters back when they had their empire going on. All stomping on heads, massacring whole peoples left and right. And hell. What they did in India. I think people have written books on that. But hey, at least they were polite about it.
Germany? Why aren't you griping about them? As far as atrocities are concerned, they've got the whole world involved in this Pretty Big Deal about 70 years back. Did some pretty awful things. Why don't you remind us of their past every time someone brings up Deutsche Telekom? Blame them for their history?
The sad fact is, you can blame a ton of nations for a ton of things. So...
Why even bring it up to begin with? It has very little to absolutely no bearing on the conversation at hand, and serves no purpose other than to score yourself some edgy internet kid points. Conversations such as this are better served as ignorant comments on Youtube. Nothing more.
Last edited: