Caution: HOT! The Tricky Case of the McDonald’s Coffee Spill Lawsuit

Thoughts from a former barista

It was the 1990s, and I was a kid, but I still remember the adults discussing what was to become one of the most famous lawsuits of all time: A 79-year-old lady went through a McDonald’s drive-thru, ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee, and set it between her legs. She spilled the coffee on herself, sued McDonald’s, and walked away with almost 3 million dollars.

This is a simplified version of what happened.

The takeaway from this case for most people in the 1990s was: Don’t put hot coffee between your legs. But we already knew that! They said.

Some even thought this “jackpot justice” case was a set-up: Need money? Spill coffee on your grandma and call it an accident!

Who drives around with coffee between their legs? said others.

The McDonald’s case has been reviewed and re-reviewed by law students until the present. Many now label this case as one of the most misunderstood cases of the 20th century.

So, was the case a “frivolous lawsuit” as it was labeled in the ‘90s? Or, did Stella Liebeck deserve the compensation she received?

Here are some little-known facts about this significant case.

(Every detail counts!) So, take a seat with a cup of moderately hot coffee, and let’s review the case.

The facts of Liebeck‘s famous coffee spill

It was February 27, 1992. A 79-year-old grandmother by the name of Stella Liebeck sat on the passenger’s side of a Ford Probe as her grandchild went through the drive-thru.

Stella ordered a coffee and the car was parked when she tried to add milk and sugar to her drink. She set the coffee cup between her legs and pulled the far side of the lid toward her. She spilled all of the coffee on her cotton pants.

Most in the ’90s believed Stella Liebeck walked away with a bandaid and boo-boo. However, this spill was much more serious.

The coffee was so hot it sent Stella into shock. Instead, of enjoying a hot cup of coffee with her grandchild, Stella was taken to an emergency room for treatment. The coffee caused third-degree burns in her crotch area. She had to have an expensive skin graft. For eight days she received treatment in the hospital.

It took Stella two years to recover from this incident. That’s a lot of time when you only have a few years left to live.

Insurance would not cover all the costs of Stella’s treatment. Also, Stella’s daughter had to take extended leave from work to take care of her mother causing financial hardship.

Stella requested 15-$20,000 from McDonald’s so she could cover her medical expenses.

She argued that the coffee was almost boiling. Is it safe to serve coffee that is capable of third-degree burns out of a drive-through window? She asked for the temperature to be lowered so others wouldn't suffer the same fate.

McDonald’s countered her plea with an $800 offer. In hindsight, McDonald’s would have gotten off much lighter if they’d granted Liebeck’s request. However, they were confident that the jury and judge would see their side.

McDonald’s case

Today, coffee lovers riding the third wave of coffee look for single-origin coffee beans from exotic locations. We love the flavor of small-batch roasts. We love hand-picked beans. We want pour-overs and light roasts where you can taste all the delicate floral, chocolate, nutty, and citrus notes. We want expensive coffee beans pooped out by civet cats. The flavor is unbeatable smooth!

In the 1990s, coffee drinking for most was much simpler. You wanted a lot of coffee and you wanted it HOT. McDonald’s had a policy to keep coffee between 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit at all franchises. Who wants cold coffee? Who puts coffee between their legs? Why not add cream and sugar after it cools down a bit?

The truth was coffee at this temperature can cause third-degree burns after just 3-seconds of contact with the skin. Other establishments served their coffee at 160 degrees. McDonald’s had already had at least 700 complaints against them for coffee burns from 1982 to 1992. McDonald’s had spent more than $500,000 to settle these claims. But, not all of these cases were as severe as Stella’s.

The jury decided that McDonald’s coffee was dangerously hot and the company was mostly at fault. However, Liebeck was 20% responsible for how she opened her coffee lid from back to front.

Liebeck received $160,000 in compensation. Also, the judge added tacked $2.7 million to McDonald’s bill for punitive damages. This $3 million case was about the amount that McDonald’s made in two days of coffee sales.

McDonald’s also lowered the temperature of its coffee by ten degrees.

Modern times

As a former barista and coffee lover, I was curious to look back at this case.

I have written many coffee articles and researched the coffee business, top brands in the business, and the Specialty Coffee Association’s standards. I was surprised by some of the information I found…

• Did you know that the SCA standard for brewing coffee is still above the temperature that caused the McDonald’s coffee burn scandal?

To achieve the Golden Cup Standard, water temperature, at the point of contact with coffee, is recommended to fall between 200°F ± 5° (93.0°C ± 3°) — Specialty Standard Association

• Most of the highest-rated at-home coffee machines adhere to this standard. This temperature is known to help the coffee bloom to extract the best flavors from the beans.
• Did you know that Ford Probe cars in the 1990s did not have drink holders (including Stella Liebeck’s)? If Stella’s car had drink holders, this incident may never have happened.
• Stella’s cotton pants were thought to have trapped the heat of the coffee next to her skin exacerbating her burns.
• Stella’s age and thin skin may also have contributed to the severity of her burns.
• Also, why did Stella’s insurance leave her in the lurch? Shouldn’t they have paid for all necessary expenses?

A case is closed

Stella’s case closed with her walking away with enough to cover her medical expenses and make her comfortable for the remaining years of her life.

The 1990s saw a rise in litigation. About 10 in 1,000 Americans opened lawsuits during this time period. Warning labels appeared on ordinary home appliances. Caution: HOT! showed up on McDonald’s lids.

Many thought this increase in court cases were due to the McDonald’s coffee case and Stella’s win.

What are your thoughts on this famous case?

Who was right; who was at fault?

What part do our humanity and compassion play in a court case?

Should our coffee hold to SCA standards for the best flavor? Or, should it be low enough that it doesn’t cause third-degree burns and two years of recovery?

The jury of opinion is still hung.

Let me know your thoughts in the comments!

Sean Kernan studied the McDonald’s Lawsuit in a corporate law class. Here are his thoughts: