February 28, 2004

McDonald's Coffee

It seems that there is some concern about the frivolity of cases such as the McDonald's coffee spill case in which a woman spilled a cup of McDonald's coffee back in February, 1992, as she was trying to remove the top with the cup between her knees while a passenger in her grandson's car.

Here's the McDonald's case in a nutshell. First of all, the lady suffered third-degree burns (full thickness burns which required debridement and then skin grafts) on her inner thighs, crotch, and butt, which required her to be hospitalized 8 days.

McDonald's produced corporate records revealing almost 1000 burn claims, some third-degree burns similar to this lady's, between 1982 and 1992, which proved that McDonald's was aware of the extent and nature of the danger. McDonald's actively enforced policy was to keep its coffee at 185 degrees F., plus or minus 5 degrees, to maintain optimum taste, when other establishments serve coffee at much lower temperatures. Coffee at home is generally 135 - 140 degrees.

The quality assurance manager of McDonald's testified that a burn hazard exists when any food is served at above 140 degrees and that coffee at 185 degrees is not fit for human consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat at those temperatures. Liquids at 180 degrees will cause full thickness skin burns in 2 to 7 seconds.

Jurors said that a McDonald's executive who testified didn't help McDonald's in the case when he testified that he knew McDonald's coffee caused third-degree burns at that temperature and that even though people wouldn't think that was possible, McDonald's decided not to warn customers. He also said that McDonald's had no intention of changing the policies about serving coffee because "there were more serious dangers in restaurants."

The jury awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages, reducing that to $160,000 because they felt the lady was 20% at fault, and $2.7 million in punitive damages (two days of coffee profits). The judge reduced the punitve damages to $480,000. The parties settled the case for an undisclosed amount after that.

Before trial, the woman wanted $20,000 to settle the matter. McDonald's declined to settle.

The day after the verdict, McDonald's coffee temperature was reduced to 155 degrees in the pots, nearly eliminating the burn hazard from McDonald's gourmet coffee.

Posted by Bill at February 28, 2004 11:41 AM
Comments

But still, what kind of moron puts a styrofoam cup between their legs and removes the lid? Yes coffee was too hot, I agree, but even my three year old knows better than to put her paper McDonalds cup between her legs> She knows they are flimsy and any voluntary or involuntary reaction on her part would crush it like a bug. So both parties are at fault! :-)

Posted by: Jeff A at February 28, 2004 12:58 PM

Oh yeah, and McD's coffee sucks, the convenience store has better than that stuff!

Alright, I'll shut up again!

Posted by: Jeff A at February 28, 2004 01:00 PM

Part of the reason she suffered such severe burns as well was do to the type of material she was wearing...

-d

Posted by: d at February 28, 2004 01:18 PM

I can't understand why more Americans are not richer. It is so easy to sue over there. Do some people wake up in the morning and say "Who am I gonna sue today". Kids suing parents, MacDonalds getting sued because coffee is hot and their food causes obesity. If it is legitimate then fine, but why waste the courts time and tax-payers money suing for something you should know? I burn my mouth when I eat hot food I have cooked in the microwave. Who should I sue? LG, for making microwaves with settings too high? I just think it is an easy way to make a fast buck.

Posted by: Michelle at February 28, 2004 04:43 PM

There are cases where even frivilous litigation can serve a purpose, there are now warning labels on the coffee cups, which is a good idea. Sometimes it just has to be done to make a point even when others may not understand that point. Yes the woman should have sued for the hot coffee because they did make it too hot, but she shouldn't have put it there! I think the blame was more 50/50 but then I am not an expert in law. Bill has stated the facts but never offered an opinion per se so I am hoping to hear that too.

Shutting up again!

Posted by: Jeff A at February 28, 2004 05:21 PM

yes, she was partially to blame, thus: reducing that to $160,000 because they felt the lady was 20% at fault."

michelle: it's not that easy to WIN or PREVAIL in a claim. anyone has the right to sue, AS IT SHOULD BE. that's why you hear of frivolous suits filed. NOT WON.

Posted by: stacey at February 28, 2004 07:34 PM

Jeff -- For a guy I represented, the lid wasn't totally secure and he suffered 2nd degree burns because of the 180 degree temp of the coffee -- burns to his ... well, it was no way to enlarge a penis ... we settled for 20 grand, which was a few years before this lady dumped the coffee. There are theories of recovery concerning food -- if it's not fit for human consumption and the restaurant serves it, the restaurant may be strictly liable(liable without having to prove carelessness) in some states or negligent (akin to lack of reasonable care).

McDonald's admitted that the coffee was too hot to be safely imbibed -- it was not fit for consumption, yet by serving it, the consumer should be able to have the reasonable expectation that the coffee is fit or safe. The coffee was not safe.

And Michelle, in most cases, experts testify, whether they be doctors, engineers, or others, and they are paid for their time in travelling, evaluating, consulting, advising, and testifying; and that expense is great, especially if more than one is retained.

Posted by: Bill at February 28, 2004 08:58 PM

Thanks Bill and Stacey, thats why I like this blog, I learn something new here a lot of the time.

Posted by: Jeff A at February 29, 2004 01:40 AM

They serve the coffee much cooler here and we have the warnings printed on the cups.

Posted by: Anji at February 29, 2004 03:19 AM

alright. you idiots out there. if you're STUPID enough to not take caution drinking HOT liquid drinks. hands down to you. for you are an idiot. and people please quit suing because you are again a flaming imbecille and get off your fat lazy butt and work.

Posted by: Martha at April 5, 2004 10:30 PM