Pretty much everyone’s heard about the infamous McDonald’s Coffee Case. But most of what you “know” is almost certainly wrong. At Siegfried & Jensen, we believe that our legal system works best when everyone has access to the facts and gets to make up their own mind. We won’t tell you what to think, and neither should anyone else.
The facts agreed upon by both parties . . .
• At the time of the incident, McDonald’s kept its coffee at 180 – 190 degrees Fahrenheit, 40 or more degrees hotter than the industry norm of around 140 degrees.
• At 180 degrees, liquids will cause 3rd degree burns (the most severe kind) to human skin in two to seven seconds, much faster than the 60 or so seconds of liquid at around 140 degrees.
• The plaintiff was a passenger in a stopped car when she removed the lid from the cup to add cream and sugar, and the heat from the coffee contributed to the styrofoam cup collapsing in her lap.
• She suffered 3rd degree burns (the most severe kind) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital/groin area.
• She was hospitalized for 8 days during which time she underwent debridement treatments and skin grafts.
• She was severely disabled for months after being discharged from the hospital.
• She tried to settle the claim for $20,000, but McDonald’s refused.
• During litigation, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims from adults and children burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992 (including claims involving third-degree burns substantially similar to the plaintiff’s), and McDonalds had agreed to large settlements in a number of these cases.
Based on the evidence, the jury decided that McDonald’s had not taken the threat of danger to the community seriously enough and awarded the plaintiff $200,000 in compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages . . . which equals about two day’s worth of McDonald’s coffee sales.
The judgment was later reduced to $160,000 in compensatory damages and $480,000 in punitive damages, because the jury found the plaintiff 20 percent responsible for the spill.
No one will ever know the final ending to this case, because the parties eventually entered into a secret settlement which has never been revealed to the public.
A post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the McDonald’s in question had dropped to 158 degrees Fahrenheit —within the norm for the industry.
It’s one thing to read a series of statements, if you’d like to see and hear more, this documentary includes interviews with the victim (Stella Liebeck), as well as photographs of her injuries.
12/2011 Update: For those of you who are interested, Professor Caroline Forell of Loyola Law School has written “McTorts: The Social and Legal Impact of McDonalds Role in Tort Suits” by Professor Caroline Forell (2011) about three high profile McDonald’s lawsuits, including this one.
