Macdonal Case
The McDonalds Case – A Legal Icon
The McDonalds case has spawned a good deal of literature, for an in depth study and analysis of the facts of the case look at A Bloom,W. Halton, Mecam, Java Jive, Genealogy of a Juridical Icon, 56 U. Miami L. Review, 113 (2000); A similar situation in J&M Parsons v. McDonalds, 698 N.E.2d 516 (1998)
Here is a somewhat fuller explanation of Stella Liebeck 's suit against McDonalds. As you will see, the coffee temperature can cause third degree burns in a matter of seconds, McDonalds had settled many other cases before Stella 's (and she initially only sought a small amount of money for her daughter 's time away from work and her own medical expenses), McDonald 's lawyer in closing argument blamed the severity of her burns on the fact that she was old and had very thin skin, the punitive award was reduced by the trial judge, and the case was settled for much less than the amount published in the media while the case was on appeal.
The following is taken from Richard Wright 's materials on Torts: I. The Media
“By far the most widely known tort case, in the United States and internationally, is the "McDonald 's coffee spill" case (Liebeck v. McDonald 's Restaurants, P.T.S., Inc., Civ. No. _____), which was tried and decided in Albuquerque, New Mexico in August 1994. The case hit the news wires and was almost immediately reported and derided by newspaper editors and television and radio talk-show hosts throughout the United States and around the world as a case in which an elderly (implicitly clumsy) lady spilled a cup of hot McDonald 's coffee on herself while riding (or even while driving) in a car, sued McDonald 's, and received a whopping 2.9 million dollars from a sympathetic jury. Some of the stories and editorials mentioned, in passing and without any elaboration, that Stella Liebeck, the plaintiff in the case, had incurred $10,000 in medical expenses, or that she had suffered third-degree burns. Many
The McDonalds case has spawned a good deal of literature, for an in depth study and analysis of the facts of the case look at A Bloom,W. Halton, Mecam, Java Jive, Genealogy of a Juridical Icon, 56 U. Miami L. Review, 113 (2000); A similar situation in J&M Parsons v. McDonalds, 698 N.E.2d 516 (1998)
Here is a somewhat fuller explanation of Stella Liebeck 's suit against McDonalds. As you will see, the coffee temperature can cause third degree burns in a matter of seconds, McDonalds had settled many other cases before Stella 's (and she initially only sought a small amount of money for her daughter 's time away from work and her own medical expenses), McDonald 's lawyer in closing argument blamed the severity of her burns on the fact that she was old and had very thin skin, the punitive award was reduced by the trial judge, and the case was settled for much less than the amount published in the media while the case was on appeal.
The following is taken from Richard Wright 's materials on Torts: I. The Media
“By far the most widely known tort case, in the United States and internationally, is the "McDonald 's coffee spill" case (Liebeck v. McDonald 's Restaurants, P.T.S., Inc., Civ. No. _____), which was tried and decided in Albuquerque, New Mexico in August 1994. The case hit the news wires and was almost immediately reported and derided by newspaper editors and television and radio talk-show hosts throughout the United States and around the world as a case in which an elderly (implicitly clumsy) lady spilled a cup of hot McDonald 's coffee on herself while riding (or even while driving) in a car, sued McDonald 's, and received a whopping 2.9 million dollars from a sympathetic jury. Some of the stories and editorials mentioned, in passing and without any elaboration, that Stella Liebeck, the plaintiff in the case, had incurred $10,000 in medical expenses, or that she had suffered third-degree burns. Many
References: [edit] Trial and verdict The trial took place from August 8–17, 1994, before Judge Robert H