Wes Skiles' Widow Looking For 25 Million from Lamartek

[StefinSB]

Mine was a bad question.

I get the sense that even though the restaurant owner was aware of complaints that the coffee was too hot, hot enough to create 3rd degree burns on the customer's leg requiring skin grafting, you still find that a lawsuit under these circumstances is frivolous?

Do you see how trying to define such a personal term as "frivolous" can become a challenge? I don't think it's regional...it's quite personal.

So would it have been OK if the coffee would have caused "only" 2nd degree burns after the customer was stupid enough to spill it? Coffee is made with boiling water and the boiling point of water is 100C .....

 

[JohnnyC]

Seriously?

We're seriously going to quibble about coffee?

Actually, it's quite important when the idea of tort reform and frivolous lawsuits come up since it is quite often the first talking point people bring up, and the frivolity of the Skiles lawsuit has been raised.

The problem is that people are often misinformed about the minutia regarding the Liebeck vs. McDonald's case. The minutia is quite important in cases like these, and in fact it was what determined that Stella Liebeck's case was sound. So yes, quibbling about coffee is important in the context of determining what is frivolous and what is not.

While we were fortunate in this case that the jury found in favor of Lamartek, it is entirely possible that there could be a design flaw in the unit, and regardless of all of the things Wes Skiles did incorrectly, Lamartek could still have been found culpable.

 

[undrwater]

So would it have been OK if the coffee would have caused "only" 2nd degree burns after the customer was stupid enough to spill it? Coffee is made with boiling water and the boiling point of water is 100C .....

See my post just after the one you quoted regarding reasonable risk.

 

[boulderjohn]

So would it have been OK if the coffee would have caused "only" 2nd degree burns after the customer was stupid enough to spill it? Coffee is made with boiling water and the boiling point of water is 100C .....

It doesn't stay at that temperature long at all, losing a lot of heat immediately as it brews. The important temperature is the one at which it is stored. and many coffee experts argue that you should not even brew it with boiling water, let alone store and serve it near that temperature.. Use Google to see what experts say about brewing and serving coffee. I just looked at about 10 sites recommending the best temperatures for storing and serving brewed coffee. Some mention the McDonald's case, and those that do say it was too hot. I would say the average recommendation for storing on those sites was from 155°-170°. Some recommended lower. The theory seems to be that if you like a jolt of heat, go to the higher range, and if you want good flavor, go to the lower range.

The McDonald's manual used back in the day of the case said coffee should be served between 195°-205°.

 

[boulderjohn]

Yes. Coffee is supposed to be hot. It's made with boiling water, ferchrissakes!

I am really impressed that you are able to drink boiling coffee. It would absolutely destroy my mouth. Everyone I know lets it cool off. You should try it.

 

[mderrick]

Well, rather than discuss the temperature of hot coffee, let's return to something resembling a Scuba Related Court Case....

In Skiles v Lamartek, case hinged on a question was there a reasonable possibility (i.e. > 50% certainty) of a design defect in O2ptima that led to his death. After having six years to research, test, expose and document such a defect... shortly before the trial the plaintiff purchased the services of diving expert Dr Alex Deas. After sinking an unmanned O2ptima in a swimming pool and taking a few pictures of it with a cell phone in a baggie (no I'm not joking), Dr Deas was able to declare that the problem was what was described as "sticky water" which "froze" three cells for approximately ten minutes. The sticky water later completely and inexplicably disappeared leaving behind no trace in the sealed head, on or near the sensors which were nearly twice as old as the manufacturer recommends (again, I'm not joking).

I return you to your debate of "frivolous"...

 

[undrwater]

No. You've opened up a new debate about "experts"!

 

[JohnnyC]

Well, rather than discuss the temperature of hot coffee, let's return to something resembling a Scuba Related Court Case....

In Skiles v Lamartek, case hinged on a question was there a reasonable possibility (i.e. > 50% certainty) of a design defect in O2ptima that led to his death. After having six years to research, test, expose and document such a defect... shortly before the trial the plaintiff purchased the services of diving expert Dr Alex Deas. After sinking an unmanned O2ptima in a swimming pool and taking a few pictures of it with a cell phone in a baggie (no I'm not joking), Dr Deas was able to declare that the problem was what was described as "sticky water" which "froze" three cells for approximately ten minutes. The sticky water later completely and inexplicably disappeared leaving behind no trace in the sealed head, on or near the sensors which were nearly twice as old as the manufacturer recommends (again, I'm not joking).

I return you to your debate of "frivolous"...

I'd be willing to take this highly defective O2ptima off his hands for proper disposal. I won't even charge him for my services.

Please tell me there is video of this somewhere. I have to see this stupidity first hand.

 

[mderrick]

I'd be willing to take this highly defective O2ptima off his hands for proper disposal.

I do think I understand. With $25M and lives of others at stake, the attorneys for the various law firms representing the Skiles Estate exhaustively subpoenaed every e-mail at Dive Rite and along with e-mail from several other companies (including mine), along with other documents related to the design, development and sale of the O2ptima. Failing to document any actual defect (at least to the satisfaction of a jury after taking six days to present their case) I feel confident that this particular rebreather might be one of the most carefully examined CCR designs in history! (Except, possibly, for the one sold by Dr Deas.) If you continue to have any concerns regarding sticky water, the plaintiff's attorneys did suggest adding lots of sponges and some chemical desiccant gel to the design is a solution that Dive Rite may have avoided as a cost saving measure.

 

[boulderjohn]

A number of years ago, when I was first starting cave diving, my instructor wanted me to use a multi-gas computer. (My previous tech diving had been with the no-computer school of thought.) Not wanting to spend a lot of money, I bought a used Nitek He (from Dive Rite) on eBay. It did not come with a manual, so I did a web search and found a PDF version of the manual.

But it turned out not to bet a PDF version of the actual manual. It was the PDF version of a DRAFT of the manual. I don't recall what site it was from, and I have no idea why a draft would be on the web, but there it was. And it was more than a draft--it was a working document. It used Adobe's ability to make comments on text, and there were a couple such comments in the margins. These comments were concerned about whether certain safety-related warnings should be explicitly stated in the text--would it come back to bite them in case of an incident? Did it imply that they knew there was a defect with the computer?

I am not writing this as an attack on Dive Rite. I thought every one of the comments was a legitimate question, and I did not see anything in the text that concerned me as a user of the product. What they were clearly concerned about was what a lawyer might do with those statements in case of a problem. It would not surprise me, in fact, to learn that each of the controversial statements made it into the final draft. I have certainly seen much more serious warnings in the manuals of other products created by other companies.

I am just writing this to show the level of concern that goes into the creation of product guides, and especially the kind of foresight needed when they balance the need to give us good and proper directions for the use of the product with the fear that something they have written might be twisted to indicate they knew and were trying to hide some kind of defect.