In 1992, Stella Liebeck, who was 79 years old at the time, spilled an entire cup of McDonald’s coffee in her lap and received third-degree burns on 16 percent of her body. Most of us remember the case, which became a cornerstone for tort reform efforts and the butt of jokes on late night television.
But there’s more to the story.
These are the facts the jury heard in deciding the case:
- Stella was not driving the car when she took the lid off her coffee. She was sitting in the passenger seat and the car was parked.
- As a result of the burns, Stella went into shock, spent 8 days in the hospital, underwent skin grafting, became scarred and was on disability for two years.
- Stella offered to settle with McDonald’s for $20,000 to cover medical expenses and damages but McDonald’s countered with $800.
- McDonald’s coffee is served at 180˚ – 190˚: at that temperature, liquid can cause third-degree burns in 3 – 7 seconds. This is 30˚ higher than coffee made by the average home coffee maker and that served by other coffee establishments.
- Two experts (one an engineer and the other a burn specialist) testified that this risk of harm is unacceptable.
- McDonald’s admitted it knew of the risk of serious burns from scalding hot coffee for 10 years. They also admitted that their coffee is “not fit for consumption” when sold because it can cause severe scalds to the mouth or throat or when spilled.
- From 1983-92, nearly 700 people claimed they had been burned by McDonald’s coffee.
- McDonald’s admitted that customers were not aware of the extent of this risk.
- Stella’s physician testified that her injury was one of the worse scald burns he had seen.
The jury unanimously voted to award Stella Liebeck $200,00 for compensatory damages and reduced it to $160,000 because they found she was 20 percent at fault. The jury awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages for McDonald’s callous conduct. That amount was equal to just two days of McDonald’s coffee sales. The judge reduced this to $480,000, but he stated that McDonald’s had engaged in “wilfull, wanton and reckless” behavior. Liebeck and McDonald’s eventually settled the suit confidentially.
Two jurors later commented on the case, one noting that McDonald’s showed “callous disregard for the safety of people” and another noting that the facts were “overwhelmingly against the company.”
You can read more about the case on the Hot Coffee site or view this video about the case from the New York Times.
