[1] The plaintiff, Stella Liebeck (1912–2004),[2] a 79-year-old woman, purchased hot coffee from a McDonald's restaurant, accidentally spilled it in her lap, and suffered third-degree burns in her pelvic region.
[7] Ex-attorney Susan Saladoff sees the portrayal in the media as purposeful misrepresentation due to political and corporate influence.
[8] In June 2011, HBO premiered Hot Coffee, a documentary that discussed in depth how the Liebeck case has centered in debates on tort reform.
On February 27, 1992, Liebeck ordered a 49-cent cup of coffee from the drive-through window of a McDonald's restaurant at 5001 Gibson Boulevard Southeast in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
[11] Liebeck was wearing cotton sweatpants, which absorbed the coffee and held it against her skin, scalding her thighs, buttocks and groin.
Liebeck's attorneys argued that these extra seconds could provide adequate time to remove the coffee from exposed skin, thereby preventing many burns.
[22] Another of McDonald's reasons for serving such hot coffee is advice from consultants that high temperatures are necessary in brewing to fully extract the flavor.
[12] McDonald's quality control manager, Christopher Appleton, testified that this number of injuries was insufficient to cause the company to evaluate its practices.
The plaintiffs argued that Appleton conceded that McDonald's coffee would burn the mouth and throat if consumed when served.
[24] The Albuquerque Journal ran the first story of the verdict, followed by the Associated Press wire, which was picked up by newspapers around the world.
[7] McDonald's asserts that the outcome of the case was a fluke, and attributed the loss to poor communications and strategy by an unfamiliar insurer representing a franchise.
[28] Detractors have argued that McDonald's refusal to offer more than an $800 settlement for the $10,500 in medical bills indicated that the suit was meritless and highlighted the fact that Liebeck spilled the coffee on herself rather than any wrongdoing on the company's part.
[33] In McMahon v. Bunn Matic Corporation (1998), Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Frank Easterbrook wrote a unanimous opinion affirming dismissal of a similar lawsuit against coffeemaker manufacturer Bunn-O-Matic, finding that 179 °F (82 °C) hot coffee was not "unreasonably dangerous".
[34] Since Liebeck, major vendors of coffee, including Chick-Fil-A,[35] Starbucks, Dunkin' Donuts, Wendy's, Burger King,[36] hospitals,[37] and McDonald's[38] have been defendants in similar lawsuits over coffee-related burns.
[39] Two years prior to Liebeck, a similar lawsuit was settled during the trial for $15 million due to injuries from a sink in a rented apartment.
[40] Another lawsuit involving McDonald's was heard in Florida with the restaurant sued after a four-year-old girl suffered second-degree burns after a chicken nugget from a Happy Meal fell in between her leg and the seatbelt.
On October 21, 2013, The New York Times published a Retro Report video about the media reaction and an accompanying article about the changes in coffee drinking over 20 years.