Liebeck Vs Mcdonald's

Citizens of the United States of America enjoy a lifestyle of freedom unlike that of any other country in the world. Companies and businesses are expected to comply with the standards of the average consumer; with that being said, American citizens are much more likely to file a law suit than consumers of a different nationality. In the year 1994 alone, thousands of law suits were filed (FindLaw). The most notable case, with exception to the Denny’s payout, was Stella Liebeck versus the popular fast food chain McDonald’s. Stella sustained third-degree burns when she accidentally spilled a McDonald’s cup of coffee onto her lap. She spent eight days in the hospital, receiving skin grafts for burns on her pelvic region. Stella was awarded $2.86

million for her injuries (Consumer Attorneys of California). Liebeck versus McDonald’s quickly became one of the most publicized cases in American history, and also one of the most controversial. There were those that sided with Liebeck, stating that the coffee was too hot if it was able to cause third-degree burns, and also those that sided with McDonald’s, stating that it was ridiculous a person could sue for coffee being too hot. I personally believe that the case was ludicrous, and should have never been entertained in a court of law.
Coffee is a drink that is traditionally served hot. Studies show that prior to the Liebeck case, McDonald’s served their coffee between 180 and 190 degrees Fahrenheit. Personal coffee makers brew their coffee between 195 and 205 degrees Fahrenheit, which makes the finished product considerably hotter than what was served to Stella Liebeck (AbnormalUse). It is also interesting that McDonald’s sold billions of cups of coffee that year, so obviously the product was not too hot for the rest of the nation. Also, this was not the first cup of coffee Liebeck had ever ordered from the fast food restaurant. She had ordered the popular hot drink many times, each cup exhibiting a warning of hot liquid inside, so there is no feasible way she could claim ignorance.
Any medical professional will gladly tell you that an elderly’s person skin is much thinner than the normal human being’s. Once a person surpasses the age of 50, the epidermis (outermost layer of the skin) begins to wear at an accelerated rate, exposing the dermis (WebMD). Stella Liebeck was 79 years old when she had her accident. Her extremely thin skin posed no chance at combating the high temperatures of the coffee. Many McDonald’s customers had spilled coffee on themselves before, but the younger “victims” did not have nearly the amount of damage Liebeck had. I might also add that Stella was wearing cotton sweatpants at the time of the incident. The absorbent material clung to her leg, and caused the liquid to burn her more severely than if she would have been wearing a different fabric (AbnormalUse).
When companies sell a product to a customer, are they responsible for what that customer does with the product?

How was McDonald’s supposed to know that Stella would spill the coffee on herself? Coffee is meant to be served hot, just as blades are meant to be sharp. Stella suing for being burned by coffee is the same principal as a person suing a knife company after being cut by one of their products. The world is a dangerous place; many things around us have the capability to cause damage. Corporations should not be held responsible for any damage sustained after using their product improperly. McDonald’s could not have prevented Stella spilling the coffee on herself.
.
In the case of Liebeck versus McDonald’s, I definitely would have sided with McDonald’s. Despite the court’s decision, I disagree with the decision to reward Stella Liebeck financially. I stand by my decision for the reasons that coffee is meant to be served hot, Liebeck was extremely thin-skinned, and a company should not be held responsible for the misuse of their product even if it was unintentional. Our society is one that has almost become dependent on law suits, cases like Liebeck’s should not have been entertained in court. In my opinion, the judicial system failed

McDonald’s.