The Truth About the McDonalds Coffee Case

Perhaps the most well-known "frivolous lawsuit" is the story of Stella Liebeck - the woman who was burned by hot coffee from McDonalds. Here are the facts about the McDonald's lawsuit; decide for yourself if the suit was frivolous:

1: Stella Liebeck was a 79-year-old grandmother who was the passenger in her grandson's car.

2: McDonalds served the coffee at roughly 190 degrees. 190 Degree liquid will cause third-degree burns within 2-7 seconds of contact with the skin.

3: Stella was wearing cotton jogging pants, and the 190 degree liquid soaked into the pants. She received third-degree burns to her thighs and genitals. This is what a third-degree burn looks like:

4: McDonalds admitted that the coffee was not fit for human consumption at the temperature they served it.

5: Over 700 men, women, and children had been burned prior to Stella's lawsuit.

6: Stella offered to settle with McDonalds just for her medical bills. They refused.

Here is a PDF file that explains the suit in better detail. It's authored by the attorney who won the case. I tried to get permission from him to post this, but he never responded to my e-mails. This didn't surprise me: No one I've ever contacted about tort reform has bothered to respond to my e-mails.

Hopefully, this clears up some of the misconceptions that Stella was a careless woman who spilled some hot coffee on herself and just needed some aloe vera.

The question I have is why didn't the media report about how badly burned and disabled she was? I wonder if it has anything to do with the tens of millions of dollars McDonalds spends on advertising?

Comments

[Justinian Lane]

Actually, I managed a cafe for a couple of months, and there are some sort of regulations for water temperature. The health department comes out with a thermometer and inspects the temperature of the water from your faucets, in your dishwasher, etc. Granted, that's a county or city level thing, but there is some regulation to water temperature.

[Justinian Lane]

Actually, I managed a cafe for a couple of months, and there are some sort of regulations for water temperature. The health department comes out with a thermometer and inspects the temperature of the water from your faucets, in your dishwasher, etc. Granted, that's a county or city level thing, but there is some regulation to water temperature.

[Josh]

How insanely stupid. Whatever happened to common sense and personal responsibility? It's like suing a parking lot's manager coz you got struck by lightning while trying to get into your car. It's just fuggin' ludicrous!

[Ted]

Justinian, don't be disingenuous. A health-code regulation requiring that dishwashing water be above a certain temperature has nothing to do with the commenter's false claim that there was a different regulation requiring coffee to be cold that McDonald's violated.

[Danny Spooner]

it may seem a bit hot but if your travelling long distances to get home from macdonalds it would stay warm n for a start who drinks red-hot coffee in a car! dumbasses!

[Tbear]

1.) It's McDonald's. NOT MacDonald's. I know, some of you will think that's trivial. Oh well, it's just my pet peeve.
2.) If you don't have a cup holder, I can think of two other alternatives. Hold the cup in your hand or put it on the floor between your feet. (Obviously, NOT if you're driving!)
3.) I have never had coffee (restaurant or home) that has been cool enough to drink immediately. I doubt that Ms. Liebeck has either. Therefore, she should have known that this, too, would be hot. I wouldn't stick a hot curling iron between my legs, nor would I put a FLEXIBLE foam coffee cup full of hot coffee there. Have I ever burned myself? Yup. You know why? Because I was careless! Whether it was the oven, waffle maker, curling iron or spattered grease, it was MY fault; not GE's, West Bend's, Clairol's or Wesson's.
Just my two cents...

[Many of you are dumbasses]

Grow up.

water can only go to 100 degrese idot

[minidrags]

I can't beleive how hot they serve coffee!
190 degrees!
I think all mcdonalds should be blown up and stuffed onto a suitcase. Then it should be sucked into a black hooooooooooooooooooooooooooooole.

[fedup]

OK - I am fed up with all of the disinformation about this case. The real bottom line is that McDonald's kept their coffee at such a high temperature because it allowed them to keep the coffee "fresher" tasting longer - eliminating waste and cost from dumping "old" coffee. This saved them money. However - they were knowingly serving a product that could cause severe burns. The money was awarded to Stella by a jury of her peers, who decided that McD's was responsible. And the money they gave her? Equal to an average of two day's coffee profits for McD's... That is what I think is disgusting. They make over a million dollars a day off coffee, yet they couldn't afford to keep it at a safe teperature. Suppose the drive through worker had spilled it onto a driver's face? What would you all be saying now?

[Nelson]

1) The effort to encourage Americans to distrust jury trials and a democratically-accountable public court system (however imperfect) in favor of the unresponsive power of corporations is simply disgusting and unpatriotic.

2) Restricting the rights of Americans to seek justice through the republic's institutions so that McDonalds' et al. can protect their profits (their existence isn't threatened by a long shot), since it sabotages our American way of life, stinks of treason against the republic.

[JT]

This is ridiculous. I work at McDonalds and i'm sure as an almost 80 year old woman she is frail as hell. Maybe if her grandson grabbed the coffee and put it in a holder she would not have had this mistake. I see numerous people DAILY who grab cups by the TOP and we tell them not to, have common sense. Do not EAT AND DRINK while driving either. If she was intelligent enough to touch the coffee and realize it was hot, immediately put it down. Yes, the bills should have been paid...sure...but christ...

[Ted]

If the drive-through worker spilled coffee on Liebeck's face, then he'd be guilty of negligence, and McDonald's would be liable under principles of respondeat superior. That doesn't require McDonald's to be held liable for a customer's own negligence.

I refuted Justinian a long time ago. Why he's still selling the McDonald's coffee case as a story shows the dishonesty of the opposition to tort reform.

More: http://www.overlawyered.com/2005/10/urban_legends_and_stella_liebe.html

[Rob]

I have actually read all about this case, there were no cup holders in the car, she only wanted mcdonalds to pay for the trip to the hospital costs, mcd's refused to pay more than $800 so she sued, they finally settled for less than what the court ordered which only wound up to be around 1 million, besides her over 700 people also had reported 3rd degree burns, even mcd's says that the coffee was too hot

[cant say]

i think thats arfull i feel so sorry for the people that got burned

[yea]

some one got burnt now get over it ok!!!

[Adam]

Critics are blind to the basic notion of our system of law. Noneconomic damages pay for attorney's fees. The plaintiff's attorney is the only person that stands for their right not to be harmed by the negligence of a large financially and politically protected corporation, or insurance company. There is no statutory relief or protection for victim if there is no way to pay for the case. Limiting rewards to medical bills is a clear message that the government has been bought by commercial interest. If a plaintiffs lawyer cannot afford to bring a case because of extensive medical bills we've defeated any hope for justice for those who are the most injured by a faulty system. Our only alternative is to award seperate lawyer's fees as is done in Britain. The system will simply break down if we can't afford to protect the most injured. For example, an individual w/ $250,000 worth of medical bills (a serious injury costs apx. 40,000 per day in hospital costs) a $250,000 judgement (Tx. cap) would not even cover her medical bills b/c the attorney handling the case must pay for it by charging 40%. Britian's system is far more transparent and honest. Instead of asking juries for pain and suffering, we should simply force the loosing party to pay for the plaintiff's fees. This would also reduce the chances of large rewards which are always reduced on appeal anyway.

[aniq]

hey just a suggestion, I hope Mcdonalds should consider this, instead of putting, "CAUTION: HOT!" why not put, ATTENTION: This is 190 degress, can you handle it? just a suggestion. Peace!!

[Idril]

The fact is..it happened. Stella was burned. Sometimes these things happen and no amount of prevention can stop them from doing so. Every person in this world says it was Stella's fault, until they do something stupid and the tables are turned. Walk a mile, think about it. We live in a world of accidents, usually unexpected ones. WE ARE VERY CLOSE MINDED. So McDonald's should warn their customers a little better than they were. You cannot just ASSume that every single person will not spill it. It's always a possibility. With a better warning, the customer would have been significantly more at fault; the argument for them could have been stronger. But that wasn't the case, so they should have handed over the loot. They're loaded anywho.

hmmmmmmmmm........... whod of thought that coffee would be served hot! unless ofcourse you bought a frappuccino you dumb shit!!!

[annonamus]

they knew it was obviously hot , they are so stupid, there should of beebn no lawsuit.

[John]

thats a stupid case against mcdonalds wut would people do if the mcdonalds coffee was warm they wouldnt go back same with all the food mcdonalds serves come on people everyone knows coffee is hot all you have to do is say "can you throw a couple of ice cubes in that for me" wow that was hard

[Ingabore]

Nelson your a f*cking Idiot Thats why you work at McDonalds... Why dont you get the facts before flopping your dumbass lips... the car wasnt moving.. and she was not driving... maybe instead of becoming McDonalds Manager... you should go to school and learn something!!!!!

[steve]

um, aren't third degree burns white or black? and if she actually had a third degree burn she wouldn't have felt any pain because her nerves would be burned off instantly.

[steve]

also how did they know how hot the coffee was? was she waiting there with a thermometer?