United Settles "Cockpit Porn" Case

[Helos2Galaxy]

Reminds me of Paula Caughlin's story. Been to Tailhook a few times previously, uphalled about what went on after attending a few times. Hit the Navy up for $2M....

 

[Murphy]

When I grow up to be a real major airline pilot, can I find porn in the cockpit?

 

[bubbers44]

She or what ever she is is scamming and everybody knows it. Why did United let her get by with that? She doesn't deserve a dime and everybody knows it.

 

[sktwstdfrk]

United hired women?

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/115499/drunk_airline_pilots/

2: 09-2:18

Here is CA Stout's new book.... and with a NUDE woman on the front?????

http://www.aardvarkmemories.com/authorbio.htm

Here's how it went down...

Chick left flying to write books, and get out of a job that would not allow her to toke up in the woods with her deadlocked hippie friends. When the books didn't sell because (judging by the cover) they are horrible, this tree-hugging cracker jack needed income. AND NOW YOU KNOW...THE REST OF THE STORY!

 

[dojetdriver]

Not to open this can of worms, but the McDonald's Coffee Case is a lousy example to use in tort reform debates. Facts:

• 81 year old, articulate, lady suffers severe (3rd degree) burns to her legs, thighs and crotch. Due to her age, healing is slow and sometimes impossible.
• She was a passenger in a car which did not have a cup holder. She held the coffee between her legs to try to add cream and sugar. The contents of the coffee spilled between her legs.
• She spent 8 days in the hospital and received skin grafts to cover her dying tissue.
• The Plaintiff had never been a party to any previous litigation
• McDonald's took pride in serving the hottest coffee anywhere. Their coffee was better because it was hotter, being brewed at 205 and served at 190.
• Study found that McDonalds served its coffee at least 20 degrees hotter than any other location.
• The Plaintiff initially asked McDonald's for only $20,000 to help cover her medical expenses, McDonald's refused.
• Subsequently the matter went to mediation and the Mediator suggested to McDonald's they settle for approximately $225,000. McDonald's refused
• McDonald's had defended more than 700 coffee burn cases prior to this one and had reached settlements up to $500,000
• The Plaintiff's counsel said she would have settled for less than $130,000. McDonald's refused.
• Most vendors serve coffee at 135 to 140 degrees. At this temp it takes about 20 seconds to cause a third degree burn. At 190 degrees (which McDonald's was using, the time to cause a third degree burn is only 3 seconds)
• The jury found the lady 20% at fault for her injuries and reduced her award from $200,000 to $160,000. They added punitive damages of $2.7 million to punish McDonald's for serving 190 degree coffee despite the warning of over 700 prior cases and prior independent warnings from the medical establishment (including the Shriner's burn institute) that serving coffee at that temp was dangerous.
• Subsequently the Court reduced the award to $480,000 to the 81 year old.
• The coffee (and hot water for tea) on the airplane is served at about 120 degrees.

Believe it or not, it is an injury to a passenger when it happens on the airplane. It is supposed to be reported just like any other passenger injury.

Air Safety work ... who'd have thought we'd be studying coffee burns, but most passenger injuries are just this sort of stuff. Alaska airlines even had a "Tea Expert" for this very reason.

Good job on posting that. Most people are terribly ignorant when it comes to that specific case and like to throw it out there as a frivolous law suit.

 

[jonjuan]

So why settle out of court? Would a normal jury of her peers necessarily rule in her favor? I think not. Minimally, make her prove her case. I don't understand this strategy to fold like a house of cards and pay through the nose. Better to go down fighting for what you actually believe in than cave to a shyster.

Exactly. Why did UALs high-powered and higher-paid lawyers settle out of court if they knew they had a solid case? Settling looks pretty bad to the company.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

Exactly. Why did UALs high-powered and higher-paid lawyers settle out of court if they knew they had a solid case? Settling looks pretty bad to the company.

Going to trial and losing looks worse (and can potentially be more expensive both in attorney fees, residual costs and a potentially large award); not to mention the negative publicity they would receive regardless of the outcome.

 

[dojetdriver]

Going to trial and losing looks worse (and can potentially be more expensive both in attorney fees, residual costs and a potentially large award); not to mention the negative publicity they would receive regardless of the outcome.

True, reference the McDonald's case.

 

[jetjock6]

Going to trial and losing looks worse (and can potentially be more expensive both in attorney fees, residual costs and a potentially large award); not to mention the negative publicity they would receive regardless of the outcome.

With the level that the airlines have set the bar these days is negative publicity even an issue anymore?

Lets face it, when the only good publicity the airlines have gotten in years stems from a jet ditching in the river, it's a sad state for the industry.

 

[eaglesview]

Quite frankly I'm glad to see someone was able to stick it to UAL. God knows they have been, and continue to stick to us. Good for her.