Personal Injury Hotline.com | Personal Injury Lawyers | 24/7

free legal consultation

Get Free Legal Consultation
24/7, Evenings & Weekends
CALL NOW: 1-800-234-5529
TEXT US AT: 516-268-3959
  • Home
  • About Us
  • The PIH Difference
  • Types of Cases
  • FAQ’s
  • Blog
  • Contact
You are here: Home / News / The McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case … a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing!

The McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case … a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing!

September 1, 2014 by Personal Injury Hotline 3 Comments

columnsTwenty-two years later and the hot coffee case is still brewing! Talk with anyone about frivolous lawsuits and, no doubt, the McDonald’s “hot coffee” case will come up as a prime example. Get into a discussion about what’s wrong with our legal system, and there it is again, “Man, an old woman spills hot coffee on herself and a runaway jury awards her millions!”

The story of 79-year-old Stella Liebeck, the woman who spilled McDonald’s coffee on herself in 1992, is widely known. It’s been fodder for conservative talk show hosts and late night comedians. It was even a featured storyline for a classic Seinfeld episode.

If you are one of those who think they know the facts, be prepared to be proven wrong. While the results of the case were highly published, the actual details of the case were severely under reported.

Here are the facts:

Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson’s car when she was severely burned by McDonalds’ coffee in February 1992. Liebeck, 79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served in a styrofoam cup at the drive through window of a local McDonalds.

After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap.

The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused.

During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebeck’s. This history documented McDonalds’ knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard.

McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees Fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. They admitted they had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures (coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.)

Further, McDonalds’ quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforced its requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the “holding temperature” of its coffee.

Plaintiffs’ expert, a scholar in thermodynamics applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck’s spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn.

McDonalds asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there. However, the company’s own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving.

McDonalds also argued that consumers know coffee is hot and that its customers want it that way. The company admitted its customers were unaware that they could suffer third-degree burns from the coffee and that a statement on the side of the cup was not a “warning” but a “reminder” since the location of the writing would not warn customers of the hazard.

The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages. This amount was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found Liebeck 20 percent at fault in the spill. The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, which equals about two days of McDonalds’ coffee sales.

Post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the local Albuquerque McDonalds had dropped to 158 degrees Fahrenheit.

The trial court subsequently reduced the punitive award to $480,000 — or three times compensatory damages — even though the judge called McDonalds’ conduct reckless, callous and willful.

No one will ever know the final ending to this case.

The parties eventually entered into a secret settlement which has never been revealed to the public, despite the fact that this was a public case, litigated in public and subjected to extensive media reporting.

—Excerpted from ATLA fact sheet. © 1995, 1996 by Consumer Attorneys of California

Related

Filed Under: News

Personal Injury Hotline

About Personal Injury Hotline

Comments

  1. AvatarVince P says

    September 2, 2014 at 3:03 pm

    That Seinfeld episode where Kramer sues over a coffee burn is a classic.
    Jackie Childs to Kramer…

    “You put the balm on? Who told you to put the balm on? I didn’t tell you to put the balm on. Why’d you put the balm on? You haven’t even been to see the doctor. If you’re gonna put a balm on, let a doctor put a balm on.”

    Reply
  2. AvatarJohn M. DeProspo says

    September 2, 2014 at 3:05 pm

    Totally agree!

    Reply

Trackbacks

  1. When a Restaurant Serves Bad Food - PersonalInjuryHotline.com says:
    June 6, 2015 at 9:19 pm

    […] As for that infamous McDonalds lawsuit, most people do not know the true facts of the case. Most news outlets reported the case as another example of frivolous lawsuits and used it to push for “tort reform.” I wrote an article on that case a little while back. I am including a link so you can read the full story. https://personalinjuryhotline.com/mcdonalds-hot-coffee-case-facts/ […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

step1
Speak with a lawyer… CALL 1-800-234-5LAW
step1
Email us your question… CLICK HERE
step1
Get more information… CLICK HERE

Related

Recent Posts

  • Playground and School Accidents
  • How Does Having a Dog Affect Your Homeowners Insurance Rates
  • Will my insurance rates go up after an accident?
  • Should I go to the hospital / doctor after an accident?
  • Proving Negligence in your Personal Injury Case

Categories

  • Featured
  • News
  • Sliders

Welcome to Personal Injury Hotline.com

We are personal injury lawyers ready to answer your most basic legal question … “Do I have a case?”

Every minute of every day, someone is injured in an accident. And every minute of every day accident victims can find out their rights, and how to protect them, by calling, or emailing, Personal Injury Hotline.com.

No matter which method of communication you choose, the consultation is always fast, easy and FREE.

Personal Injury Hotline.com… where getting answers to your legal questions is as easy as 1-2-3.

Related

step1
Speak with a lawyer… CALL 1-800-234-5LAW
step1
Email us your question… CLICK HERE
step1
Get more information… CLICK HERE

Related

About Us

Personal Injury HotlinePersonal Injury Hotline was established in 1987 as a toll-free number 1-800-234-5LAW for accident victims in the New York/Metro area who wanted immediate answers to legal questions
Read More…

Recent Articles

  • Playground and School Accidents
  • How Does Having a Dog Affect Your Homeowners Insurance Rates

For Personal Injury Lawyers

If you are an established personal injury lawyer or law firm that:
(1) understands the Internet;
(2) have your own website and
(3) would like to learn more about how to increase your practice by becoming part of our group, please drop us an email.

Contact Us

Email us today for a Free Legal Consultation

Toll Free Number::
1-800-234-5LAW
Copyright © 2021 PersonalInjuryHotline.com · disclaimer · privacy policy
Personal Injury Hotline.com is a service of the law firm of Jeffrey S. Kimmel.
The Personal Injury Hotlinesm and PersonalInjuryHotline.comsm are servicemarks of Jeffrey S. Kimmel.