Mcdonald hot coffee case analysis. Mcdonald's Hot Coffee Case Study 2022-12-15

Mcdonald hot coffee case analysis Rating: 9,4/10 763 reviews

The McDonald's hot coffee case, formally known as Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, is a famous product liability lawsuit that occurred in the United States in the 1990s. The case involved a 79-year-old woman named Stella Liebeck who sustained severe burns after spilling hot coffee on herself at a McDonald's drive-thru in New Mexico. Liebeck was hospitalized for eight days and required multiple skin grafts as a result of the injuries she sustained.

Liebeck filed a lawsuit against McDonald's, alleging that the fast food chain was negligent in serving coffee at a dangerously high temperature. Liebeck argued that McDonald's knew or should have known that serving coffee at such a high temperature was unsafe and could cause serious injuries, but the company failed to adequately warn customers or take appropriate precautions.

During the trial, it was revealed that McDonald's served its coffee at a temperature of between 180 and 190 degrees Fahrenheit, which is significantly hotter than the industry standard of around 135 to 140 degrees. Experts testified that coffee at such a high temperature can cause third-degree burns in just a few seconds.

The jury ultimately found in favor of Liebeck and awarded her $200,000 in damages. However, the amount was later reduced to $160,000 on appeal. Liebeck and McDonald's eventually reached a settlement for an undisclosed amount, and the case was dismissed.

The McDonald's hot coffee case received widespread media attention and became a popular example of what some consider to be excessive or frivolous litigation. However, the case also shed light on the issue of product safety and the importance of companies taking appropriate precautions to protect their customers.

Overall, the McDonald's hot coffee case serves as a cautionary tale for companies to be mindful of the potential risks associated with their products and to take appropriate steps to protect their customers from harm. It also serves as a reminder for individuals to be aware of their own safety and to use caution when consuming potentially hazardous products.

Stella Liebeck vs. McDonald’s Restaurants

mcdonald hot coffee case analysis

I am still wondering why Pearson was collecting unemployment? Others believed the coffee was placed between her legs which had spilled when Stella had tried to open the lid. In the Pearson v. The manufacturer had known or ought to have known the risk but did not provide adequate information or warning. This risk is often assumed by the coffee suppliers, and spilling coffee on a customer is an act of negligence on their part. As recently as 2019 and 2020, Don't Get Scalded by McDonald's Hot Coffee: Use Precaution Consumers should be aware of the potential harm that can result from spilling McDonald's -- or any -- coffee onto their skin. Shortly after, Stella started screaming. Liebeck sustained second- and third-degree burns.


Next

McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case: The Real Story & Why It Matters

mcdonald hot coffee case analysis

The paper will be revised until you are satisfied. This included children, and the company was aware of these injuries. This lawsuit had impact on both the business world and the rules of the law. Are your grades inconsistent? Because the alleged failure to warn involved a product, not premises, summary judgment was properly granted as to premises liability. The coffee spilled and Ms. Shih could not establish proximate cause because the court held that the alleged defect was too attenuated from her injuries. Are you busy and do not have time to handle your assignment? They are reliable, and you can be assured of a high-grade paper.

Next

Case Analysis

mcdonald hot coffee case analysis

The minimum requirement to be an essay writer with our essay writing service is to have a college degree. In the Liebeck v. What if the paper is plagiarized? Or, was it a greedy corporation that knew people were being horribly burned and did nothing because it was cheaper for them not to? There are some facts associated with Liebeck v. Coffee should never reach the temperature of 190 degrees Fahrenheit and it should never be given to customers in such a way. Make sure you include all the helpful materials so that our academic writers can deliver the perfect paper.

Next

McDonald's Hot Coffee Case Revisited in Starbucks Litigation

mcdonald hot coffee case analysis

It was undetermined if temperature the coffee was served at was too hot. Those are just a tip of the iceberg. Ask most non-attorneys about the McDonald's "hot coffee" lawsuit. As demonstrated in the case, the modern society is not protective of consumers. While the issues in the dry cleaning lawsuit, Pearson v. McDonald's Restaurants: Frivolous or Fair? Shih sustained second-degree burns from the incident.

Next

Mcdonald's Hot Coffee Case Study

mcdonald hot coffee case analysis

Liebeck might have just suffered a first degree burn, without much damage to her skin. But what damages did the jury award and why? Managers and the legal environment: Strategies for the 21st century 6th ed. Our academic writing service relieves you of fatigue, pressure, and stress. The amount was by far much more than the medical bills that the plaintiff incurred and the compensation for the body injuries. Though there was a warning on the coffee cup, the jury decided that the warning was not large enough nor sufficient.

Next

McDonald's Hot Coffee Case

mcdonald hot coffee case analysis

The major focus of this paper will be to critically analyze these two cases on the stated facts, the issues, the applicable laws, and the decision of the judge and the jury. She purchased it through the drive-thru and while her grand son drove, she opened the lid while the cup was between legs to add sugar and cream. They have a wide variety of different products. Have your literature essay or book review written without having the hassle of reading the book. Another patient named Cindy was a boisterous Vietnamese lady who had been saving for a tummy tuck for years. To do so, it can expand its southwestern chicken offerings. This extreme temperature resulted in Ms.

Next

The McDonald's Coffee Cup Case: Separating McFacts From McFiction

mcdonald hot coffee case analysis

However, the application of the comparative negligence doctrine also helped relieve the burden on both the plaintiff and the defendant; great for the plaintiff because if the jury should adopt the doctrine of contributory negligence, Ms. Shih carried both teas to her table and sat down. This lady is 79 years old at the time was passing through the McDonald's drive through appearing in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and asked for a cup of coffee which was offered in Styrofoam cups. Before researching these two cases, both were very frivolous; however, as I progressed in the research process, I realized that case-one is not frivolous in any form. Still, it refused to change its policy, maintaining scalding temperature requirements for its coffee. How badly was she burned? Each tea was given to Shih in a double-cup — one full cup placed within an empty cup.

Next

McDonald's Hot Coffee Case Analyzed

mcdonald hot coffee case analysis

Get your paper price 124 experts online She remained in the hospital for eight says for skin grafting procedures and debridement treatments. This article is less concerned with the controversy surrounding the case and more with the process of reasoning within, but will allude to the former where pertinent. Although my offices are in Orlando and Winter Garden, Florida, I accept cases anywhere in Florida or Georgia, including nearby cities such as Clermont, Dr. There were no cup holders or level surfaces in the vehicle. The minimum requirement to be an essay writer with our essay writing service is to have a college diploma. Our academic writers will tackle all your computer science assignments and deliver them on time.

Next