The McDonald’s hot coffee case is constantly paraded out as an example of the American tort system gone crazy. Although I hate deflating client expectations, it is my duty to do so if those expectations are unrealistic. Accordingly, I have to relate to the them the real facts of the McDonald’s case.
Stella Liebeck, 79 years old, was sitting in the passenger seat of a car, having purchased a cup of McDonald’s coffee. After the car stopped, she tried to hold the cup securely between her knees while removing the lid. However, the cup tipped over, pouring scalding hot coffee onto her. She received third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, necessitating hospitalization for eight days, whirlpool treatment for debridement of her wounds, skin grafting, scarring, and disability for more than two years.
Despite these extensive injuries, she offered to settle with McDonald’s for $20,000. However, McDonald’s refused to settle. The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages — reduced to $160,000 because the jury found her 20 percent at fault — and $2.7 million in punitive damages for McDonald’s callous conduct. The trial judge reduced the punitive damages to $480,000. Afterward, the parties settled out of court.
The jury heard the following evidence in the case:
- By corporate specifications, McDonald’s employees were required to dispense its coffee at between 180 to 190 degrees;
- Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the skin is burned away down to the muscle/fatty-tissue layer) in two to seven seconds;
- Third-degree burns do not heal without skin grafting and debridement that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability of the victim for many months, and in some cases, years;
- McDonald’s admitted that it had known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than ten years — the risk was brought to its attention through numerous other claims and lawsuits.
- From 1982 to 1992, McDonald’s coffee burned more than 700 people, many receiving severe burns to the genital area, perineum, inner thighs, and buttocks;
- Not only men and women, but also children and infants, had been burned by McDonald’s scalding hot coffee.
- Witnesses for McDonald’s admitted in court that consumers were unaware of the extent of the risk of serious burns from spilled coffee served at McDonald’s required temperature;
- McDonald’s witnesses testified that it did not intend to turn down the heat – As one witness put it: “No, there is no current plan to change the procedure that we’re using in that regard right now;”
- McDonald’s admitted that its coffee is “not fit for consumption” when sold because it causes severe scalds if spilled or drunk;
- Liebeck’s treating physician testified that her injury was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen.
Moreover, the Shriner’s Burn Institute in Cincinnati had published warnings to the franchise food industry that its members were unnecessarily causing serious scald burns by serving beverages above 130 degrees Fahrenheit.
In refusing to grant a new trial in the case, Judge Robert Scott called McDonald’s behavior “callous.”