Woman Burned by McDonald's Hot Coffee, Then the News Media | Retro Report | The New York Times
Summary
TLDRIn 1992, Stella Liebeck sued McDonald's after suffering severe burns from spilled coffee. The case awarded her $2.9 million, sparking media frenzy and public outcry. The true story, however, was more complex; McDonald's served coffee at 180-190°F, causing third-degree burns. Despite the jury's punitive damages to prompt temperature reduction, the case was misreported, portraying Liebeck as greedy. The actual settlement was significantly less, and McDonald's later lowered their coffee temperature.
Takeaways
- 👵 Stella Liebeck, an 81-year-old woman, sued McDonald's after suffering severe burns from their coffee, which was served at an unusually high temperature.
- 💺 The incident occurred while she was a passenger in a parked car, not driving, which is a common misconception about the case.
- 🔥 McDonald's coffee was served at 180-190°F, which is significantly hotter than the temperature of most home-brewed coffee.
- 🚑 Stella suffered third-degree burns over 16% of her body and had to undergo extensive medical treatment, incurring $10,000 in medical bills.
- 📝 Initially, Stella only asked McDonald's to cover her medical expenses, but they offered just $800, leading to her decision to sue.
- 📉 McDonald's had prior knowledge of the issue, with nearly 700 burn claims between 1983 and 1992, yet they did not change their coffee-serving practices.
- 🏆 The jury awarded Stella $2.9 million, which included $200,000 in compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages, later reduced by the judge.
- 📉 The media's portrayal of the case was often sensationalized and misleading, focusing on the large sum awarded rather than the facts of the case.
- 🗣️ The case became a rallying point for those advocating for tort reform, with Stella being unfairly depicted as a greedy individual exploiting the legal system.
- 📉 The actual settlement amount was significantly less than the initial jury award, and was settled for less than $500,000.
- 🔍 The case is now used as a litmus test for potential jurors to gauge their openness to the facts presented in a case, rather than preconceived notions.
Q & A
What incident led to Stella Liebeck suing McDonald's?
-Stella Liebeck, an 81-year-old woman, sued McDonald's after she spilled a cup of their coffee in her lap, resulting in severe burns.
How much was Stella Liebeck awarded after suing McDonald's?
-Stella Liebeck was initially awarded $2.9 million, but the amount was later reduced to about $650,000 by the judge.
What was the public's perception of Stella Liebeck's lawsuit?
-The public generally perceived Stella Liebeck's lawsuit as frivolous and believed she won a lottery by spilling coffee on herself and becoming a millionaire.
Why was Stella Liebeck's case taken to court?
-Stella Liebeck's case went to court because McDonald's refused to settle out of court and she wanted to ensure that McDonald's would lower the temperature of their coffee to prevent similar incidents.
What was the temperature of the coffee that caused Stella Liebeck's burns?
-The coffee that caused Stella Liebeck's burns was served at a temperature between 180 to 190° Fahrenheit, which is about 30° warmer than most home coffee brewing machines.
How many similar incidents were there before Stella Liebeck's case?
-Between 1983 and 1992, nearly 700 people claimed they had been burned by hot coffee at McDonald's.
What was the jury's rationale for awarding punitive damages in Stella Liebeck's case?
-The jury awarded punitive damages to send a message to McDonald's to turn down the temperature of their coffee, as they believed the company was callous and indifferent to the danger their product posed.
What was the final outcome of the case after the verdict?
-The case was settled for less than $500,000, and McDonald's reportedly lowered the serving temperature of their coffee in their franchisee handbooks.
How did the media's portrayal of the case affect Stella Liebeck and her family?
-The media's portrayal of the case as a frivolous lawsuit turned Stella Liebeck into a villain and caused her and her family emotional distress, as they felt misunderstood and bullied.
What impact did Stella Liebeck's case have on the legal system and public discourse?
-Stella Liebeck's case became a rallying cry for those advocating for tort reform and is often cited as an example of a jury being out of control. It also became a litmus test for screening potential jurors.
How did the temperature of the coffee and the design of the car contribute to Stella Liebeck's injuries?
-The high temperature of the coffee and the slanted surfaces in the car, which provided no place to safely put the coffee, contributed to the severity of Stella Liebeck's burns when the coffee spilled into her sweatsuit.
Outlines
🔥 The Infamous McDonald's Coffee Lawsuit
This paragraph details the case of Stella Liebeck, an 81-year-old woman who sued McDonald's after suffering severe burns from their hot coffee. The case gained widespread media attention, leading to a public perception that was often misunderstood. The incident occurred in 1992 when Liebeck, a widow, was in a parked car and unable to find a stable place to hold her coffee, resulting in a spill that caused third-degree burns over 16% of her body. The medical expenses amounted to $10,000, and after McDonald's offered only $800, Liebeck sought legal action. The case revealed that McDonald's served their coffee at 180-190°F, which was significantly hotter than the average home-brewed coffee and could cause severe burns in a very short time. Evidence showed that nearly 700 people had been burned by McDonald's coffee between 1983 and 1992, indicating a known issue that the company had not addressed. The case was not about the money but about the need for safety improvements in the product.
📰 Media Frenzy and Misunderstood Facts
The second paragraph discusses the media's role in shaping public opinion about the McDonald's coffee lawsuit. The jury awarded Stella $200,000 in compensatory damages, which was reduced to $160,000 due to her role in the spill. They also set punitive damages at $2.7 million, based on two days of coffee sales revenue, intending to send a message to McDonald's to lower the coffee temperature. However, media reports often failed to convey the full context and facts of the case, leading to a simplified and often inaccurate narrative. This resulted in Stella being portrayed as a villain who frivolously sued McDonald's, which was far from the truth. The actual settlement amount was significantly less than the jury's suggestion and was settled for an undisclosed amount, believed to be less than $500,000. The case has since been used as a cultural reference and a cautionary tale in the discussion of tort reform and frivolous lawsuits.
🚫 Lingering Misconceptions and the Impact on Jurors
The final paragraph highlights the lasting impact of the case on public perception and its use in the legal field. Despite some attempts to provide a more accurate portrayal of the events, such as in the documentary 'Hot Coffee', the misconceptions about Stella Liebeck's case persist. The case has become a litmus test for potential jurors, as it reveals their predispositions and openness to facts. The narrative has cast McDonald's as the victim, which is a point of sadness for Liebeck's family. Interestingly, McDonald's has since adjusted their coffee serving temperature in their franchisee handbooks. Stella Liebeck passed away in 2004, but the emotional turmoil she experienced due to the public's misunderstanding of her case continues to resonate.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Stella Liebeck
💡McDonald's
💡Compensatory Damages
💡Punitive Damages
💡Burn Injuries
💡Media Frenzy
💡Tort Reform
💡Jury Deliberation
💡Public Perception
💡Legal Precedent
💡Coffee Temperature
Highlights
An 81-year-old woman, Stella Lebeck, was awarded $2.9 million after suing McDonald's for serving coffee that was too hot, causing severe burns.
Stella Lebeck's case became a media frenzy and was widely misunderstood, often portrayed as a frivolous lawsuit.
The public perception was that Lebeck won a lottery by spilling coffee on herself and becoming a millionaire.
Stella Lebeck was a 79-year-old widow who was burned in a parked car, not while driving.
She suffered burns over 16% of her body, with 6% being third-degree burns, leading to a week in the hospital and $10,000 in medical bills.
McDonald's initially offered $800 as compensation, which was rejected by Lebeck's family.
McDonald's policy was to serve coffee at 180-190°F, which is significantly hotter than most home brewing machines.
Between 1983 and 1992, nearly 700 people claimed to have been burned by McDonald's hot coffee.
McDonald's argued that burns were statistically insignificant, occurring once for every 24 million cups of coffee served.
The jury awarded Stella $200,000 in compensatory damages, reduced to $160,000 due to her role in the spill.
Punitive damages were set at $2.7 million, based on two days of coffee sales revenue, to send a message to McDonald's.
The media's focus on the large award amount overshadowed the details of the case and the jury's rationale.
Stella Lebeck's case was used to promote the Common Sense Legal Reform Act, becoming a symbol for frivolous lawsuits.
The judge reduced the punitive damages to about $650,000, and the case was settled for less than $500,000.
Lebeck's portrayal as a villain in the media felt like bullying to her family.
The case is now used as a litmus test for potential jurors to gauge their openness to the facts presented in a trial.
McDonald's franchisee handbooks now require coffee to be held and served at a lower temperature.
Transcripts
[Music]
in Albuquerque New Mexico an elderly
woman was severely burned when she
spilled a cup of McDonald's coffee in
her lap an 81-year-old woman has been
awarded $2.9 million after she sued
McDonald's claiming their coffee was too
hot Stella lebeck spilled just 8 ounces
of coffee but she attracted a flood of
attention the jury's award set off a
media frenzy and became a rallying cry
for those who believed are leg system at
run a monck I think it's absurd but as
her story cycled through newspaper
headlines talk show story lines and late
night punch lines one thing was lost the
facts this story is the most widely
misunderstood story in
[Music]
America the the public perception of it
is Stella leeck won a lottery she bought
the coffee she spilled it on herself and
now look she's a
millionaire when of course the facts are
much more complicated than that Stella
lebeck was a 79-year-old Widow sitting
in the passenger seat of a parked car
when she was burned on February 27th
1992 she had recently quit her job as a
department store clerk and moved to
Albuquerque to be near her daughter the
day that the burns happened my mother
and my nephew went through the
drive-thru at McDonald's and got
breakfast and coffee and they pulled
into the parking lot and in the Ford
Probe there's slanted surfaces
everywhere there's no place to put the
coffee she put it between her knees and
lifted the lid off and in the process of
doing that spilled the coffee and all of
the hot liquid went into the sweatsuit
that she was wearing and pulled in the
the seat all I remember was trying to
get out of the car I screamed not
realizing I was burned that bad I knew I
was in terrible
pain the severity of the burns caused
Stella Lebec to go into shock and her
grandson immediately took her to the
emergency room she was burned over 16%
of her body 6% of the burns were third
degree she was in the hospital for a
week medical bills were
$10,000 so Stella reached out to
Donald's and asked to be reimbursed we
couldn't believe that this could happen
over spilling the coffee so we wrote a
letter to McDonald's asking them to
check the temperature of the coffee and
to give recompense for the medical bills
and the response from McDonald's was an
offer of
$800 Stella lebeck had never sued anyone
before Albuquerque attorney Ken Wagner
took her case before they went to trial
they tried twice to settle out of court
but McDonald's refused we bought a
product it was used as intended it was
unreasonably hot and therefore
unreasonably dangerous and those were
the essential facts I was not in it for
the money I was in it because I want
them to bring the temperature down so
that people other people will not go
through the same thing I
did McDonald's policy was to serve
coffee between 180 and
90° that's about 30° warmer than most
home coffee brewing machines a burn
expert testified that liquid at 180°
could cause third degree burns within 15
seconds lawyers produced documents that
showed that between 1983 and 1992 nearly
700 people claimed that they had been
burned by hot coffee at McDonald's
McDonald's was on Big Time notice that
they had a product that was dangerous
and it was burning people we argued that
to the jury that they were callous and
indifferent in simply not turning down a
temperature an expert for McDonald's
testified that burns are exceedingly
rare one for every 24 million cups of
coffee served they just said it's
statistically
insignificant and we're not going to
change what we
do people interact with hot beverages
all the time in a fast food restaurant
and that doesn't necessarily mean that
restaurant is doing something wrong
attorney Tracy jensx tried the case for
McDonald's and argued that Mrs lebeck
bore personal responsibility because she
spilled the coffee on herself and that
McDonald's coffee wasn't any hotter than
the coffee at other fast food
restaurants she said the reason the
coffee was so hot was because that's
what customers wanted McDonald's had a
really really strong reason for why they
brewed their coffee at the temperature
they did it was an industrial standard
based on the the maximum extraction of
the flavor and the maximum holding
temperature but the jury saw how liquid
at that temperature can scald when they
were shown graphic photos of Mrs leck's
burned
groin the photos depicted where they had
to graph the skin from the side of her
legs to close the third degree burn and
I think if people would have seen the
severity of the burns they would have
realized it was not a laughing
matter after 7 Days of testimony and 4
hours of deliberation jurors came up
with a comprehensive answer to a
complicated case they unanimously agreed
to award Stella $200,000 in compensatory
damages but because she caused the spill
they reduced that to 160,000 jurors set
punitive damages to send the message to
McDonald's to turn down the temperature
of the coffee I remember I could see
Judge Scott going like this with his
pencil and I I thought oh I hope he's
counting digits on the verdict form
and he was they based the amount on the
revenue from two days of coffee sales
$2.7 million the size of the award got
the media's attention but it
overshadowed the rest of the story
details of the case and the facts
related to how the jury made its
decision went mostly
unreported several days after the
verdict I had news crews from France
Japan Germany my driveway wanting to
interview me mean I was
stunned after the verdict came in
Wednesday August 17th the Albuquerque
Journal ran the first story The
Associated Press and Reuters wire
Services then filed reports and the
story was picked up in dozens of
newspapers worldwide it became an
international news event but as the
story's reach got bigger the word count
got smaller in some papers who was not
more than a blur 697 words in the in the
Albuquerque Journal became 3 149 words
in the AP and became as few as 48 words
in various renderings by Major
Metropolitan newspapers 48 words can't
explain a lot and then woman coffee
Millions sounds like a ripoff not like a
logical consequence of a thoughtful uh
trial the report aired on more than a
dozen National broadcasts and twice as
many local news shows the condensed
telling of the story created its own
version of the truth instead of pointing
out she spilled the coffee in the
passenger seat of a parked car this was
the new narrative it seems she was
holding a cup between her legs while
driving clamped it between her legs
drove down the street spilled it burned
herself sued McDonald's and collected
Stella has received letters saying stuff
like I was driving down the road I had
no business driving down the road with
coffee between my legs and all that
stuff see they're just plain ignorant my
mother was made the villain in this
story it's like bullying it feels like
bullying I mean it's not like the
McDonald's person leaned over the car
and poured it was an accident very much
like urban legends it is a very
compelling story once everybody decides
what is true about something and the
media has been sort of an echo chamber
for it then how do you deal with the
fact that they might be wrong now she
claims she broke her nose on the sneeze
got at the Sizzler bending over looking
at the chickpeas Oho my coffee was too
hot it's coffee
the lawsuit also got a lot of play on
talk radio it was a very hot issue for a
long time it's probably one of the most
Sensational high-profile uh tort cases
of the last 20 years so when tort reform
comes up most people say oh you sure of
the McDonald's case Republican lawmakers
crafting the contract with America seize
the
moment they tapped into public outrage
over frivolous lawsuits to promote the
common sense legal Reform Act leck's
case became exhibit
a the lady goes through a fast food
restaurant puts coffee in her lap Burns
her her legs and sues and gets a big
settlement that in of it of itself is
enough to tell you why we need to have
Tor reform she spilled hot coffee on her
lap while sitting in her car and claimed
it was too hot every day we hear about
another outrageous
lawsuit Stella's portrayal as a scheming
wannabe millionaire was based on the
jury's award but that amount was only a
sugestion in reality the judge
significantly reduced the punitive
damages the judge reduced the award to
about
$650,000 according to a source familiar
with the case it was settled for less
than
$500,000 Stella was not allowed to talk
to the Press but over the last two
decades her lawsuit has become part of
the cultural
discourse pardon me excuse
us
cof we got a chance do we have a chance
you get me one coffee drinker on that
jewelry you going to walk out of there a
rich
man Stella's daughter says that although
over the years some stories have given
greater context and A New Perspective
such as the documentary hot coffee her
family is still haunted by a perception
that doesn't seem to go
away getting bigger Jesus gettinger A C
of cof million I like Toby Keith but he
did the American
Ride do we have to keep living this over
and over and over again man it's hot how
hot is it it's so hot I poured
McDonald's coffee in my lap to cool
off what people believe are the facts of
this case and How Deeply held those
convictions are has become useful to
attorneys the case that became an
example of jury's being out of control
is now used to screen potential
jurors It's a Wonderful litmus test if
you're putting someone on a jury you
really have to know how they feel about
this case to know whether they are open
to the facts that you're going to
present McDonald's has been in the
public mind cast as the victim that
Stella liebeck needed to defend her
reputation is the saddest piece of this
whole story to me Stella lebeck died in
2004 when she was
91 the emotion that she went through she
just felt like people were coming at
her McDonald's Representatives didn't
return emails or calls but according to
current franchisee handbooks coffee must
now be held and served 10°
lower
[Music]
a
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)