“Chicken McNuggets are designed to be eaten, not to be pressed against the thigh of a 4-year-old girl for two minutes"

[alaskanseminole]

Reminds me of the lady who sued Mickey D's over hot coffee. Personally, I think the parents should be charged with child abuse for feeding their child that garbage.

Parents blame McDonald’s McNuggets for Broward toddler’s severe burn​

Rafael Olmeda, South Florida Sun-Sentinel
Tue, May 9, 2023 at 4:35 PM CDT

The pained shrieks of a 4-year-old girl filled a Broward courtroom Tuesday, a vivid reminder that a family’s lawsuit against a fast-food giant over “dangerously hot” chicken nuggets is no laughing matter.

The screams were recorded in 2019, the day Philana Holmes bought her daughter a Chicken McNugget Happy Meal at a Tamarac McDonald’s drive-thru. No one is disputing that the second-degree burn on the girl’s skin was caused by the chicken. The dispute in court is over who is to blame.

Holmes and the child’s father, Humberto Caraballo Estevez, sued McDonald’s for negligence and improper training, accusing McDonald’s and the franchise operator, Upchurch Foods, of failing to protect the safety of its customers.
In opening statements Tuesday, attorneys for the plaintiffs said the franchise should have known it was passing a dangerous product through the drive-thru window and that McDonald’s corporate headquarters was to blame for failing to set safer standards.

Defense lawyer Scott Yount said the business was not to blame. “Chicken McNuggets are designed to be eaten, not to be pressed against the thigh of a 4-year-old girl for two minutes,” Yount said.

That, evidently, is how long the nugget was wedged between the victim’s thigh and her seat belt, causing second-degree burns and scars that plague the victim to this day.

McDonald’s issued a statement about the case late Monday: “We take every complaint seriously and certainly those that involve the safety of our food and the experiences of our guests,” it said. “This matter was looked into thoroughly. Ensuring a high standard for food safety and quality means following strict policies and procedures for each product we cook and serve. Those policies and procedures were followed in this case and we therefore respectfully disagree with the plaintiff’s claims.”

The first witness was Ralph Fernandez, the liaison between the franchise operator, Upchurch, and McDonald’s USA. Fernandez testified that the chicken is cooked to a temperature of 160 degrees and maintained at that temperature until served. But that temperature is intended to insure the product is fully cooked, he said.

“Is it hot enough to cause burns?” plaintiff’s lawyer John Fischer asked.
“That is not the intent,” Fernandez responded.
The trial before Broward Circuit Judge David Haimes is expected to be brief, and it is focusing only on whether McDonald’s is liable for the young girl’s injuries. If the plaintiffs win, a second trial will determine damages.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

It's weird to me that a chicken nugget would be hot enough to cause 2nd degree burns like that.

The McDonald's coffee case showed that McDonald's coffee was far far hotter than coffee from other establishments at the time. But could the same thing be said of McDonald's chicken nuggets?

 

[JupiterHawk]

Video of the story inside link. The injuries looked pretty bad. Pay for bills for the injuries and plastic surgery and call it a day?

‘Disfigured and scarred’: McDonald’s Chicken McNugget burns 4-year-old girl, Broward lawsuit claims

Two Broward parents are suing McDonald’s and its local franchisee, claiming the fast-food chain is serving one of its most popular menu items too hot, leading their daughter to suffer a scarring burn.

www.local10.com

 

[TJ8869]

McDonald’s did nothing wrong here. Food has to be cooked to a certain temperature in order to be safe for consumption. If your 4-year-old daughter isn’t capable of handling hot food then let it cool down for a few minutes before you hand it to her.

 

[BubsFinn]

Apart from something like ceviche, everything in the history of cooking, gets cooked hot enough to cause burns. That’s what cooking is. If it hasn’t, it hasn’t been cooked.
I’m no fan of McDonalds, but at some point, stupid people need to be held responsible for being stupid.

 

[mnole03]

My two year-old knows to set nuggets that are too hot aside.

 

[JupiterHawk]

McDonald’s did nothing wrong here. Food has to be cooked to a certain temperature in order to be safe for consumption. If your 4-year-old daughter isn’t capable of handling hot food then let it cool down for a few minutes before you hand it to her.

That is true - handing food to a baby in a car seat.

 

[Thunderlips71]

That child should be removed from the home. Problem solved.

 

[JupiterHawk]

My two year-old knows to set nuggets that are too hot aside.

Sounds like all 6 were dropped from the box and onto her lap. It was more of an accident. But mom should have checked the temp before handing the box or waited to arrive home. It's one in a million chance that you receive a fresh batch of nuggets but you have to be prepared for that event.

 

[EagleHawk]

Did McDonalds hand the nuggets to the child, or to the parents who then gave it to the child? I seem to remember a case in Cedar Rapids where a child choked to death on a food sample from Sam's Club. The parents sued claiming the sample was too large for a child, but Sam's won the lawsuit because the food was handed to the parent who then handed it to the child. I would have to assume that the child wasn't driving the car, so the parents must have handed the food to the child, therefore it should be the parents responsibility.

 

[IowaPackFan]

I was looking up burns and came across the below— despite being from water I assume it’s close. Poultry needs to be cooked to 150°+ so yeah, it can burn you.

 

[NoleinATL]

2nd degree burns and the nugget was trapped for 2 minutes?
That child would have been screaming bloody murder, in terrible pain, what the heck was her Mom doing, driving and couldn't stop?

The burn looks terrible, I feel sorry for the little girl but I can not point blame at Mcdonald's or the franchisee. Both kids had nuggets, only one was burnt, and the fact a parent let the nugget stay lodged between a seatbelt and her leg seems to be the primary reason for the injury

Local 10 News

 

[IowaPackFan]

Did McDonalds hand the nuggets to the child, or to the parents who then gave it to the child? I seem to remember a case in Cedar Rapids where a child choked to death on a food sample from Sam's Club. The parents sued claiming the sample was too large for a child, but Sam's won the lawsuit because the food was handed to the parent who then handed it to the child. I would have to assume that the child wasn't driving the car, so the parents must have handed the food to the child, therefore it should be the parents responsibility.

I have learned to assume at your own risk…

 

[JupiterHawk]

I was looking up burns and came across the below— despite being from water I assume it’s close. Poultry needs to be cooked to 150°+ so yeah, it can burn you.

I thought 165 for chicken and 180 for legs.

 

[IowaPackFan]

2nd degree burns and the nugget was trapped for 2 minutes?
That child would have been screaming bloody murder, in terrible pain, what the heck was her Mom doing, driving and couldn't stop?

The burn looks terrible, I feel sorry for the little girl but I can not point blame at Mcdonald's or the franchisee. Both kids had nuggets, only one was burnt, and the fact a parent let the nugget stay lodged between a seatbelt and her leg seems to be the primary reason for the injury

Local 10 News

Do we wait for the lawsuit against the car manufacturer too for not Chicken McNugget proofing their seatbelts from allowing nuggies getting trapped between seatbelt and person?

 

[IowaPackFan]

I thought 165 for chicken and 180 for legs.

I go 155°— those rules are always overkill. 😁

 

[Obviously Oblivious]

Those injuries are horrendous. Maybe I’m a rube but I would have never imagined a chicken McNugget could cause such an injury.

 

[IowaPackFan]

Those injuries are horrendous. Maybe I’m a rube but I would have never imagined a chicken McNugget could cause such an injury.

I wouldn’t either, but a lot of common foods that are cooked in oil or fire have the ability to burn you when you don’t handle them properly— see the burn chart above. Aside from McDonalds cooking them way over the 165° suggested by the USDA I don’t understand the case.

 

[Nole Lou]

Also shocked that a chicken nugget could do that, but apparently that's not in dispute.

If they can show that McDonalds handed the nuggets to the child, or spilled them on the child then I think McD is liable.

But otherwise, I don't get the case here:

the franchise should have known it was passing a dangerous product through the drive-thru window and that McDonald’s corporate headquarters was to blame for failing to set safer standards.

Is the premise that any restaurant that serves hot food is dangerous and liable?

This does seem different to the coffee case, which showed they kept the coffee much hotter than necessary and hotter than other coffee. If the nugget was 160 degrees...what's the case?

 

[mnole03]

Also shocked that a chicken nugget could do that, but apparently that's not in dispute.

If they can show that McDonalds handed the nuggets to the child, or spilled them on the child then I think McD is liable.

But otherwise, I don't get the case here:

the franchise should have known it was passing a dangerous product through the drive-thru window and that McDonald’s corporate headquarters was to blame for failing to set safer standards.

Is the premise that any restaurant that serves hot food is dangerous and liable?

This does seem different to the coffee case, which showed they kept the coffee much hotter than necessary and hotter than other coffee. If the nugget was 160 degrees...what's the case?

Wait until I give my two year-old fajitas at Chilis.

 

[alaskanseminole]

Also shocked that a chicken nugget could do that, but apparently that's not in dispute.

If they can show that McDonalds handed the nuggets to the child, or spilled them on the child then I think McD is liable.

But otherwise, I don't get the case here:

the franchise should have known it was passing a dangerous product through the drive-thru window and that McDonald’s corporate headquarters was to blame for failing to set safer standards.

Is the premise that any restaurant that serves hot food is dangerous and liable?

This does seem different to the coffee case, which showed they kept the coffee much hotter than necessary and hotter than other coffee. If the nugget was 160 degrees...what's the case?

Exactly. I they handed the family chicken nuggets cooked at 120 degrees, there'd be a different issue.

 

[millah_22]

Poor kid.

 

[Moral]

My two year-old knows to set nuggets that are too hot aside.

That is child prodigy behavior.

 

[mthawkeyes]

Is the premise that any restaurant that serves hot food is dangerous and liable?

Now we get a label on all menus and cooked food that hot food can burn you.

 

[TJ8869]

Apart from something like ceviche, everything in the history of cooking, gets cooked hot enough to cause burns. That’s what cooking is. If it hasn’t, it hasn’t been cooked.
I’m no fan of McDonalds, but at some point, stupid people need to be held responsible for being stupid.

I wouldn't go as far as saying someone was 'stupid' here. It seems to me that it was a very unfortunate situation in which no one really was negligent or at fault. McDonald's handed the woman a bag of hot food, as they've done billions of times. The woman then turned and handed the food to her children in the back seat, as I'm sure most of us have done many times ourselves.

In this case the 4-year-old girl accidentally dropped her food, as 4-year-old children sometimes do, and somecrazyhow one of the nuggets got stuck between her leg and the seat belt. I don't think anyone could have reasonably foreseen that happening - not McDonald's and not the mother.

Sometimes unfortunate things happen.

 

[BubsFinn]

I was looking up burns and came across the below— despite being from water I assume it’s close. Poultry needs to be cooked to 150°+ so yeah, it can burn you.

Did you really need a chart for that? Does anyone need a chart to know that things that have been deep fried are hot?

 

[ANYCHawk]

 

[NoleinATL]

If they can show that McDonalds handed the nuggets to the child, or spilled them on the child then I think McD is liable.

In the link I posted, there is surveillance video of the worker handing the Mom two kids meals and she then passing the meals to her children in the back

 

[drew_hawk]

I wouldn't go as far as saying someone was 'stupid' here. It seems to me that it was a very unfortunate situation in which no one really was negligent or at fault. McDonald's handed the woman a bag of hot food, as they've done billions of times. The woman then turned and handed the food to her children in the back seat, as I'm sure most of us have done many times ourselves.

In this case the 4-year-old girl accidentally dropped her food, as 4-year-old children sometimes do, and somecrazyhow one of the nuggets got stuck between her leg and the seat belt. I don't think anyone could have reasonably foreseen that happening - not McDonald's and not the mother.

Sometimes unfortunate things happen.

 

[JupiterHawk]

I go 155°— those rules are always overkill. 😁

Even for breasts? I may have to change up the rule. I guess it continues to cook while it's off the grill.

 

[alaskanseminole]

I wouldn't go as far as saying someone was 'stupid' here. It seems to me that it was a very unfortunate situation in which no one really was negligent or at fault. McDonald's handed the woman a bag of hot food, as they've done billions of times. The woman then turned and handed the food to her children in the back seat, as I'm sure most of us have done many times ourselves.

In this case the 4-year-old girl accidentally dropped her food, as 4-year-old children sometimes do, and somecrazyhow one of the nuggets got stuck between her leg and the seat belt. I don't think anyone could have reasonably foreseen that happening - not McDonald's and not the mother.

Sometimes unfortunate things happen.

And this family thinks that unforeseen, unfortunate, one in a million happenstance is worth probably millions.

 

[Wendy79]

Reminds me of the lady who sued Mickey D's over hot coffee.

You really don't know the details of the hot coffee lawsuit.

 

[torbee]

Reminds me of the lady who sued Mickey D's over hot coffee. Personally, I think the parents should be charged with child abuse for feeding their child that garbage.

Parents blame McDonald’s McNuggets for Broward toddler’s severe burn​

Rafael Olmeda, South Florida Sun-Sentinel
Tue, May 9, 2023 at 4:35 PM CDT

The pained shrieks of a 4-year-old girl filled a Broward courtroom Tuesday, a vivid reminder that a family’s lawsuit against a fast-food giant over “dangerously hot” chicken nuggets is no laughing matter.

The screams were recorded in 2019, the day Philana Holmes bought her daughter a Chicken McNugget Happy Meal at a Tamarac McDonald’s drive-thru. No one is disputing that the second-degree burn on the girl’s skin was caused by the chicken. The dispute in court is over who is to blame.

Holmes and the child’s father, Humberto Caraballo Estevez, sued McDonald’s for negligence and improper training, accusing McDonald’s and the franchise operator, Upchurch Foods, of failing to protect the safety of its customers.
In opening statements Tuesday, attorneys for the plaintiffs said the franchise should have known it was passing a dangerous product through the drive-thru window and that McDonald’s corporate headquarters was to blame for failing to set safer standards.

Defense lawyer Scott Yount said the business was not to blame. “Chicken McNuggets are designed to be eaten, not to be pressed against the thigh of a 4-year-old girl for two minutes,” Yount said.

That, evidently, is how long the nugget was wedged between the victim’s thigh and her seat belt, causing second-degree burns and scars that plague the victim to this day.

McDonald’s issued a statement about the case late Monday: “We take every complaint seriously and certainly those that involve the safety of our food and the experiences of our guests,” it said. “This matter was looked into thoroughly. Ensuring a high standard for food safety and quality means following strict policies and procedures for each product we cook and serve. Those policies and procedures were followed in this case and we therefore respectfully disagree with the plaintiff’s claims.”

The first witness was Ralph Fernandez, the liaison between the franchise operator, Upchurch, and McDonald’s USA. Fernandez testified that the chicken is cooked to a temperature of 160 degrees and maintained at that temperature until served. But that temperature is intended to insure the product is fully cooked, he said.

“Is it hot enough to cause burns?” plaintiff’s lawyer John Fischer asked.
“That is not the intent,” Fernandez responded.
The trial before Broward Circuit Judge David Haimes is expected to be brief, and it is focusing only on whether McDonald’s is liable for the young girl’s injuries. If the plaintiffs win, a second trial will determine damages.

The woman who sued over the coffee was totally justified.

She had literal GENITAL BURNS that required skin grafts.

It is sad that so many people hold her up as an example of a frivolous lawsuit, when in reality, she is a textbook example of holding companies accountable for irresponsible, harm-causing behavior.

What a lot of people get wrong about the infamous 1994 McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit

Adam Ruins Everything explains that the case wasn’t about greed, but about a working-class woman forcing a big company to make its product safer.

www.vox.com

 

[Jimmy McGill]

Yeah, my law school long paper was on Stella Liebeck vs. McDonalds.

Anytime someone tries to use that as an example of frivolous litigation I immediately know they are lazy buffoons.

McDonalds did everything possible to screw themselves in that matter. Stella almost died.

 

[ANYCHawk]

Yeah, my law school long paper was on Stella Liebeck vs. McDonalds.

Anytime someone tries to use that as an example of frivolous litigation I immediately know they are lazy buffoons.

McDonalds did everything possible to screw themselves in that matter. Stella almost died.

 

[alaskanseminole]

The woman who sued over the coffee was totally justified.

She had literal GENITAL BURNS that required skin grafts.

It is sad that so many people hold her up as an example of a frivolous lawsuit, when in reality, she is a textbook example of holding companies accountable for irresponsible, harm-causing behavior.

What a lot of people get wrong about the infamous 1994 McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit

Adam Ruins Everything explains that the case wasn’t about greed, but about a working-class woman forcing a big company to make its product safer.

www.vox.com

Never said it was frivolous. I said it "reminded me of", i.e., here we go again--McDonald's gett'n sued of hot food again. I do remember she [coffee lady] had the $hit burned out of her crotch.

My favorite quote is the title of the thread.

EDIT: Reread through your eyes and I can see where you'd draw the "frivolous" conclusion. All good.

 

[EagleHawk]

I guess prepare for warning labels on fast food containers: Do not press hot food against flesh for 2 minutes, or assume that your autistic child is capable of eating on their own in the car. What happened to the reasonable person theory?

Jury returns split verdict after parents say girl was "disfigured" by hot McDonald's chicken nuggets

A 4-year-old girl was "disfigured and scarred" after hot chicken nuggets from McDonald's fell onto her leg, her family said. The girl's parents sued McDonald's and the franchisee.

www.cbsnews.com

A jury returned a split verdict on Thursday in a Florida lawsuit alleging hot McDonald's chicken nuggets left a 4-year-old girl "disfigured and scarred," lawyers for the victim's family said.

Franchisee UpChurch Foods was found negligent while McDonald's was not, court documents show. The jury found that both the franchisee and McDonald's failed to produce instructions for the food that would have prevented the girl's injury.

Fischer Redavid PLLC, the law firm representing parents Philana Holmes and Humberto Caraballo Estevez, called the jury decision a "tremendous victory for a deserving family."

"They stayed patient and fought hard with us for multiple years against a wealthy corporation: a jury unanimously ruled in favor of our client," the firm said in a post on Facebook.

The parents filed a lawsuit against UpChurch and McDonald's in September of 2019. In the complaint, they said mom Philana Holmes stopped at a Broward County area McDonald's on Aug. 21, 2019. Her then 4-year-old daughter along with her son were in the backseat as they went through the drive-thru.


Holmes got a six-piece chicken McNugget Happy Meal with milk and a "Lion King" toy for her daughter, according to court documents. She passed the meal to her daughter.

A piece of chicken fell on the girl's leg, the Sun Sentinel reported. After the girl screamed, Holmes pulled into a nearby parking lot to help; that's when she spotted the burn.

The suit alleged the "unreasonably and dangerously hot" nuggets caused the girl's skin and flesh around her thighs to burn. Lawyers said the restaurant should have known the nuggets "were not fit for human handling with bare skin by their intended customer."

After the verdict was read, UpChurch Foods said in a statement that the restaurant followed protocols when cooking and serving the Happy Meal.


"Our sympathies go out to this family for what occurred in this unfortunate incident, as we hold customer safety as one of our highest priorities. That's why our restaurant follows strict rules in accordance with food safety best practices when it comes to cooking and serving our menu items, including Chicken McNuggets," UpChurch Foods said in a statement. "We are deeply disappointed with today's verdict because the facts show that our restaurant in Tamarac, Florida did indeed follow those protocols when cooking and serving this Happy Meal. Our community here in South Florida should remain confident that we will continue serving safe and high-quality meals, just as we've done for more than 50 years at Upchurch Management restaurants."

McDonald's also disagreed with Thursday's verdict, the company said in a statement.

"Our customers should continue to rely on McDonald's to follow policies and procedures for serving Chicken McNuggets safely," McDonald's said.

Holmes is seeking at least $15,000 in damages, according to the lawsuit. A jury has not yet decided how much McDonald's and UpChurch Foods will be required to pay.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

Better would be Venus. The night side of Mercury can drop lower than -250 F. Venus is over 800 F all the time everywhere.

 

[torbee]

Better would be Venus. The night side of Mercury can drop lower than -250 F. Venus is over 800 F all the time everywhere.

Shut up, nerd.














😉

 

[Tenacious E]

McDonald’s did nothing wrong here. Food has to be cooked to a certain temperature in order to be safe for consumption. If your 4-year-old daughter isn’t capable of handling hot food then let it cool down for a few minutes before you hand it to her.

Apparently lost on the parents is the concept that fried food is fried in hot oil, and if you get freshly fried food, it will be near the same temperature of the frying oil. Do the complain when the get a freshly baked pizza which is hot after coming out of the oven?