Remember the woman who sued McDonald’s and won millions ($2.9 million to be precise) after spilling hot coffee on herself? Like millions of others, you may have been outraged at the award for something so trivial.
There’s a film on HBO tonight that you should watch.
Hot Coffee is a documentary about Stella Liebeck, the elderly woman who spilled coffee on herself and sued McDonald’s, “while exploring how and why the case garnered so much media attention, who funded the effort and to what end.”
Like most, I read the headlines abut the suit back in 1992 and thought “jeez, this is ridiculous”.
Maybe not.
This from wikipedia:
“Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, ordered a 49 cent cup of coffee from the drive-through window of a local McDonald’s restaurant. Liebeck was in the passenger’s seat of her Ford Probe, and her nephew Chris parked the car so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. Stella placed the coffee cup between her knees and pulled the far side of the lid toward her to remove it. In the process, she spilled the entire cup of coffee on her lap
Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants; they absorbed the [180 degree] coffee and held it against her skin, scalding her thighs, buttocks, and groin. Liebeck was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that she had suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin and lesser burns over sixteen percent. She remained in the hospital for eight days while she underwent skin grafting. During this period, Liebeck lost 20 pounds (9 kg, nearly 20% of her body weight), reducing her down to 83 pounds (38 kg). Two years of medical treatment followed.”
Without being too graphic, think about that. An entire cup of 180 degree coffee dumped in your crotch, causing third degree burns on an extremely sensitive area with millions of nerve endings. An anatomical region involved in rather essential physiological functions.
Disclosure – my wife’s family was involved in McDonald’s for decades, we still own stock in the company, and know many fine people at McDonald’s.
Jun
27
Joe I also read about the horrendous burns to this elderly lady and as sympathetic as I might be, I do not see the liability or negligence here of McDonald’s. There was no allegation the top of the container was applied inapropriately, nor is 180 degrees unusual for fresh “hot” coffee. This was inded a tragedy, but a tragedy of her own making with her carelessness. I don’t see MceeDee having to shell out almost $3mm.
Tony – thanks for the note.
Not trying to avoid the issue of contributory negligence or discuss responsibility; McD was well aware of the burn issue and had made the decision to continue to serve liquids at that temperature. That’s certainly their right.
The larger issue is the purpose of the tort system; the series addresses that from several perspectives that are not often discussed. Whether one approves or decries the current tort systems, the more we hear from different stakeholders the better informed we are.
Joe
I’ve heard this… it really gives you a new perspective once you get the full story. The main question is really, what is a normal, safe temperature for a cup of coffee?
Here we have an example of a tragic outcome- the third degree burn. In my mind, the result that we would want from the system is to have the woman receive treatment for her burns and for McD to do something to lessen the chances of the coffee burning someone in the future. Unfortunately, I do not believe that our tort system usually accomplishes these goals. The current tort system is a highly expensive and inefficient mechanism of providing relief to people who have suffered injury.