The Truth About the McDonald's Coffee Case

What you haven’t heard from the "big lie" propaganda machine are the actual facts of the case, and the reasoning behind the New Mexico jury’s decision to compensate Stella Liebeck in the amount of $2.9 million for her injuries. Consider these facts:

There had been over 700 prior incidents of injuries from McDonald’s coffee that had been reported to the company and were present in company documents. They ranged in severity from minor burns to third degree burns, and resulted in numerous claims, some settling for over $500,000. Several cases involved children.

Prior to the lawsuit, McDonald’’s sold its coffee at 190 degrees Fahrenheit. Coffee you serve in your home is between 135 and 140 degrees Fahrenheit. Water that is found in your car radiator is 180 degrees Fahrenheit. At 190 degrees, it takes less than three seconds to produce a third degree burn, while at 160 degrees it takes about 20 seconds.

The coffee inflicted third degree burns on Stella Liebeck's groin, inner thighs and buttocks, necessitating seven days in the hospital for extensive skin grafts and debridement treatment. Photographs vividly demonstrated the severity of these burns, which covered six percent of her body.

A McDonald’s executive testified that McDonald’s knew its coffee caused serious burns. McDonald’s also consciously decided not to warn people of the dangers concerning the temperature of its coffee and had no intention of changing that temperature.

One week after the lawsuit, McDonald’s changed its coffee temperature reducing it by 20 degrees.

Despite Stella Liebeck's $20,000 in medical bills, McDonald’s only offered her $800 to settle her case. Stella Liebeck stated she would have never brought the suit had McDonald’s been willing to pay her medical bills.

The award by the jury was actually $200,000 to compensate Stella Liebeck for her serious injuries, and $2.7 million to punish McDonald’s for its callous disregard of its customers.

The Plaintiff, Stella Liebeck, was found 20 percent at fault, which resulted in the compensatory damage award of $200,000 being reduced to $160,000.

The jury returned this verdict despite the efforts of McDonald’s’ lawyers, who were, we may assume, highly paid and extremely good attorneys.

Given these facts, in the light of day, it becomes much more reasonable and understandable why McDonald’s got hit for those verdicts. While our system of justice has problems, it still is the best in the world. The way things are now, any person injured as a result of negligence has a chance at justice before a jury of his or her peers.

The propaganda surrounding the "McDonald’s case" is nothing more than an organized effort to take away from victims of negligence their access to justice in the courts. At Slovis, Rutherford & Weinstein, P.C., we strongly believe in the rights of regular people to seek and receive justice – in the courts, if necessary. We applaud the Liebeck case as an example of how our system should work, even in the face of opposition – then and now – from corporate America.