Question

McDonald's Coffee Case Overview The re is a lot of hype about the McDonalds' scalding coffee case. No one is in favor of frivolous cases of outlandish results; however, it is important to understand some points that were not reported in most of the stories about the case. McDonald's coffee was not only hot; it was scalding - capable of almost instantaneous destruction of skin, flesh and muscle. Here's the whole story Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson's car when she was severely burned by McDonalds' coffee in February 1992. Liebeck, 79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served in a Styrofoam cup at the drive through window of a local McDonalds After receiving the order, the grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. (Critics of civil justice, who have pounced on this case, often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true.) Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard. McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees Fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into Styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance

Answer 1

1. The plaintiff had suffered tremendous burns due to the scalding coffee of McDonalds. As a consumer friendly company, it was the duty of McDonald’s to take care of the treatment of the plaintiff. This would have been a gesture in good faith and would have portrayed the consumer friendly trait of the company.

2. McDonald’s could have studied the market and recognized the industry practices for maintaining the temperature of hot beverages offered. The temperature maintained by McDonald’s was quite high above the industry average. This, eventually, led to various scalding events with the consumers. So, in my views, McDonald’s could be considered responsible for breaching their obligation for ensuring consumer’s wellness and safety.

3. The higher temperature of the coffee was a result of the scalding events happening with the consumers. The temperature of the hot beverages was maintained too high, which compromised the safety of the consumers and led to the scalding accidents.

4. The plaintiff could have been offered compensation for both the physical as well as mental suffering caused by the scalding accident. Her treatment costs could have been covered in the same.