Think you know the story about the "outrageous" McDonald's
coffee case?
Did you know. . .
Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenter seat of her grandson's
car when she was severely burned by McDonald's coffee in 1992. Liebeck, 72 at the time,
ordered coffee that was served in a styrofoam cup at the drivethrough 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 Liebecks. 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. He admitted that
he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments
sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135
to 140 degrees.
Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively
enforces a 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 companys 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. Such secret settlements, after public trials, should not be
condoned.
-----
| The Actual Facts About The McDonalds' Coffee Case |
| "No man is above the law, and no man is below it. Nor do we require any man's permission when we require him to obey it." Theodore Roosevelt |
| Liebeck v. McDonalds |
| excerpted from ATLA fact sheet. ©1995, 1996 by Consumer Attorneys of California |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| Attorneys * Counselors * Trial Lawyers |
| THE KELLY LAW FIRM, P.C. |
| Call for a FREE case evaluation: (713) 255-2055 |
