Double points for the Phantom reference - I love that one.
I think the toddler isn’t the invitee because they didn’t choose to go to the restaurant nor are they paying, so that seems to leave it to just the parents. What is also a grey area - “protect the invitee from an unreasonable risk of harm caused by a dangerous condition”. What is “unreasonable risk”? Is it unreasonable to expect parents to keep an eye on their kids when food comes to the table? Is it reasonable to expect a server to know that a space on the table has been cleared because the toddler is grabby? Is a hot plate considered to be dangerous?
This one too - “A danger is open and obvious when the danger is known to the invitee or is so obvious that the invitee might reasonably be expected to discover it”. Shouldn’t it be obvious to the parent that hot plates are likely to show up?
I think these are the core questions. Some parents seem to think that the restaurant assumes all responsibility for keeping hot plates away from any children they bring, whereas other parents think it is their responsibility to keep an eye out for any dangers that might threaten their kids. Those parents seem to also be more aware that servers are humans and can make mistakes as to plate placement, and that the servers may have something else on their minds other than the special snowflake.
This whole thing of expecting servers to keep potentially harmful things away from other peoples’ children seems to be the same thing as parents who let their kids play in the street and then can’t understand why one of them got hit by a car.
Looking at some of the posts in this thread I have to wonder how people would deal around here.
We semi regularly eat at places that serve the food over open braiziers - one that even has real live burning charcoal to keep the soup hot - right there at the table.
We eat there with a 20 month old - sometimes in a high chair, sometimes not. To date, we have managed to get through dining without getting her burnt to a crisp.
Of course, I won’t mention the 7 year old who thought it was a good idea to grab the fry pan while we were cooking pancakes together the other day…
Does this apply to adults too? An adult who did not choose the restaurant and is not paying for the meal is not an invitee, thus the property owner has no duty regarding their safety?
Adults always enter restaurants by choice unless they’re being kidnapped. It’s not about which restaurant you go to, or who pays the bill. It’s about voluntary actions.
Unless the waiter unexpectedly dropped a flaming brazier in front of your kid in the middle of dinner, I’m not sure I see the relevance to the situation the rest of us are discussing.
Off-topic anecdote: I was at a pizza place with friends once when their 5-year-old abruptly decided to get a closer look at one of the candles on the table. Her hair promptly caught fire. Luckily quick action by her mom (thumping the flame out with a good whack) prevented injury. This is also totally not relevant to the situation being discussed, but “burnt to a crisp” made me think of it, and it’s a good story.
Tough luck for kidnap victims, eh? Not only are they kidnapped, but they can’t even sue a restaurant for pouring a pot of hot coffee in their lap.
Actually, I’m thinking the concept of invitee has to do with the property owner inviting the person on the premises, vs. that person entering uninvited. Hence the root “invite”. If children are barred from the premises, then the restaurant has no duty to make their establishment safe for children. If children are allowed to enter and eat meals, the duty exists.
Heh, many’s the time I’ve sat an oldster who then slaps a coupon down on the table like he’s won the fuckin’ lottery. :rolleyes: Harmless I know, but annoying!
As for the hot plate issue, I’m not a server but I’ve delivered plenty of food and I always warn people (even if they don’t have small children with them) of hot plates. This is the least servers can do and management should instruct them to do so. After that it’s on the parents. (Fortunately most parents will take the kids’ plate themselves.)
I apologize for being sloppy, but here’s a general summary of child as invitee. But, I swear I have seen state laws where the parent’s presence transfers any duty beyond ordinary landowner care to a non-minor to the parent. Under the circumstances we’re talking about here, the child will never be a tresspasser.
A lot of people in this thread seem to be missing or ignoring this point, which was made very early on in the thread, so there’s no excuse available for having not read it. The OP HAS indicated a safer place for the hot plates/tippy water glasses/spicy foods etc to be placed, and the wait staff has ignored this request. That alone is bad customer service, and has nothing to do with anyone wanting them to “babysit” the child.
The OP didn’t specify that happened in the case described in the OP. He’s not complaining about being ignored. The whole point of this train running off the rails in crazy town is expectation of performance without a specific request.
So, if I choose of my own free will to enter a restaurant, the restaurant has a duty regarding my safety.
If I enter the restaurant without being given a choice in the matter, the restaurant has no duty towards me anymore.
Doesn’t that seem rather backwards to you*? The adult who freely enters the restaurant is afforded a positive duty from the restaurant to ensure his safety. The child, who had no choice, and little personal capability to defend himself has no such legal protection.
*That’s a generic you, I’m sure it makes perfect sense to non-generic you, since it results in children getting the shaft.
It has nothing to do with the scenario you describe. It’s about the parent being responsible instead of the child. Whether the parent (themself, or as proxy for the child) or the restaurant is responsible is a different question. It just won’t be the child.
Again - in another, easier to understand choice of words - get over yourself and have a little fun.
If what I’ve said is against the rules, then the mods will step in and discipline me, and I’ll deal with that. No need to chide me in their stead. Don’t they have a title for that…junior something or other?
And this was moved here by the mods for whatever reason they gave when they moved it (I frankly don’t care) - I simply noticed it’s place in the pit and decided to word my posts accordingly.
You ballsoccer! That’s right…think about it…sounds bad - but it’s not! I doubt even **curlcoat **could get butthurt over that one.
I am responding to the many, many posts in this thread that say “Just ask the waitperson to put the dish down in a different spot”, as if the OP had not already, very early on, said that they had done so and were ignored.
Can you point out a post where the OP said they asked that a dish be put in a different or specific spot? I don’t remember anything about that, but I really don’t want to have to go back thru this thread…
echo6160, you are an unbelievable idiot, and lord knows I’ve met plenty of them on this board.
OK, lost that in this whole thing - I’d even forgotten that you were the OP. I agree that no server should ignore you when you ask something be put someplace different before she places it on the table. Tho I certainly would assume she was just distracted/didn’t hear before jumping to negatives.
Zeriel, Hubby and I went to the House of Blues in Downtown Disney (what a zoo) and 3-4 different restaurants in casinos in Laughlin in the past week. Did not see one high chair. OTOH, despite HoB being in/near Disney, none of those places were really kid friendly.
Double points for the Phantom reference - I love that one.