It’s the most famous tort lawsuit of all time. In February 1992, a 79-year-old woman named Stella Liebeck ordered a coffee from a McDonald’s drive-through in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Her grandson was driving the vehicle, a Ford Probe, and parked the vehicle so she could add cream and sugar. She put the coffee between her legs and inadvertently spilled the entire cup on her lap. The hot coffee was held against her skin by the sweatpants she was wearing and quickly burned much of her pelvic area. She was taken to the hospital, where it was determined she had third-degree burns on six percent of her body. After a hospital stay of eight days, she still needed care and never fully recovered.
She originally tried to settle with McDonald’s for $20,000, her realized and anticipated medical expenses. McDonald’s offered to pay only $800. She then sued in court. McDonald’s was found guilty at trial and the jury awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages and $2.7 in punitive damages (later reduced to $480,000). Both sides appealed the ruling, but it was settled out of court for an undisclosed amount. When the verdict was reached it ricocheted around the world. The initial response was one of disbelief. If you spill hot coffee on yourself, you can sue? This became known as one of the most ridiculous lawsuits to ever favor the plaintiff. One man even started the Stella Awards, devoted to the most frivolous lawsuits of the year, and named after Stella Liebeck.
In more recent years the tone has shifted. People have noted that Liebeck initially only wanted her medical care covered, and wasn’t seeking additional money. Also, the coffee that was served to her was scalding hot (between 180–190°F), clearly enough to burn someone. In fact, McDonald’s had received more than 700 reports of being burned by their coffee and had settled claims for more than $500,000 in the past. Articles now claim “You Probably Have the Infamous McDonald’s Coffee Story All Wrong” and even the New York Times has a video entitled “Scalded by Coffee, Then News Media”. I constantly see comments on Reddit referring to how McDonald’s fooled the media and people into thinking they were the victim when in reality this poor old lady was ignored by an evil corporation.
Going back through the case today, I found some of the additional facts interesting. It does seem relevant that McDonald’s knew about hundreds of burning complaints before the accident. It also seems relevant that Liebeck only wanted $20,000 and McDonald’s only offered $800, and that she incurred grievous injuries from the coffee. At the end of the day, however, I think the initial reaction was correct: this verdict was insane. The coffee spilling was an unfortunate accident that was entirely the fault of Stella Liebeck, and the verdict helped put into motion a world that today causes real economic harm.
Was the coffee too hot? Well, that depends on who you ask. According to at least one law firm, Starbucks today brews its coffee at 190°F. That seems sensible, given that the National Coffee Association recommends a temperature of 195-205°F to extract the best flavor. My teapot at home has multiple settings above 180°F, including 180°F for French press coffee and a literally boiling 212°F for black tea. It is, after all, hot coffee. Most importantly, while the hot temperature of the coffee certainly burned Liebeck’s skin quicker than it otherwise would have, even a lower, and inferior, temperature coffee would have still burned her skin. Even coffee served at a relatively cool 160°F will cause burns. The reason the burns were so bad wasn’t just the temperature but also because the cotton pants she was wearing held the coffee against her skin - that can’t be put on McDonald’s.
Additionally, while 700 burn reports sound like a lot, it needs to be put into context how big of a corporation McDonald’s is. They serve hundreds of millions of cups of coffee every year. A McDonald’s hot coffee burn was literally a one-in-a-million event (and more like one-in-ten-million). If that isn’t a safe product, I don’t know what is. Ultimately, McDonald’s being a big business hurts them in the court of public opinion. Would people be as quick to say a local coffee shop should pay for every burn its products cause? No way. Sure $2.7 million is chump change to McDonald’s. But does that really matter? If the business is at fault, they should have to pay, regardless of if they have 10 employees or 10,000. If they aren’t at fault, they shouldn’t have to pay.
Through all the smoke and mirrors, the case boils down (forgive me) to a simple question: if someone buys a hot coffee and spills it on themselves, should the business be culpable for their injuries?
This is subjective, but I think the answer has to be no. If the answer were yes, just think of what businesses would be liable for. Many restaurants serve food in cast iron skillets right from the oven. Is this necessary? Absolutely not. But it keeps the food hot for longer. If a customer knocks the skillet onto their bare skin and it burns them, should the restaurant have to pay? What if they accidentally cut themselves with a steak knife? We are surrounded by things that will cause injury if used improperly. If a business has to pay for damages when a product they sell is misused, it will incentivize everyone to sue over every accident. It will also encourage people to intentionally hurt themselves so they get a payday.
Sometimes people are responsible for their own conduct. The unwillingness to admit this has led to a world of feared liability, to the detriment of all. What happened to Stella Liebeck was a tragic accident, but one of her own making. Because of her lawsuit and others like it, there are countless warnings, caveats, and prohibitions on everything. The threat of a lawsuit always looms. Businesses have to pay ever-higher insurance policies to meet possible claims. Is this the biggest deal in the world? No. The US economy will continue to function even under the constant threat of a lawsuit. But it will create a misallocation of resources, and increase costs and barriers to entry for small businesses - while not causing an existential threat to large corporations.
That’s not to say liability doesn’t exist. If the McDonald’s employee had fumbled the coffee and spilled it into Liebeck’s lap they should be liable for every penny. Even though that would be an accident, there is clear blame. If the McDonald’s employee had failed to put the lid on the coffee, same thing. But in this case, once the coffee safely entered the car, it was the customer’s responsibility.
Hopefully, things are finally turning. A man sued Applebee’s when he was burned while praying over a plate of fajitas, but the court ruled the food was an “open and obvious” danger. There don’t seem to be as many stories about multimillion-dollar lawsuits over missing pants anymore. Anti-SLAPP laws, while not applicable to a physical harm case, at least have limited some frivolous lawsuits. Hopefully the era of “compensation culture” is coming to a close.
Just be careful when handling hot coffee.