On the one hand, truly frivolous lawsuits make sensible people want to bang their heads against the wall, but the importance of holding corporations responsible for wrongdoing shouldn’t be diminished. States’ products liability laws contain instructions about warnings: They must be in a conspicuous place and must warn the product’s user of possibly dangerous features, Wagner said. At home, most coffee makers brew a drink that measures between 135 and 150 degrees Fahrenheit. “Our position was that the product was unreasonably dangerous, and the temperature should have been lower,” Wagner said. An undisclosed settlement was eventually reached in the case of Liebeck vs. McDonald’s. She had to be hospitalized for eight days, and she required skin grafts and other treatment. The excessive heat was part of a McDonald’s promotion where they promised commuters that their coffee would still be hot by the time it got to their desks.Liebeck was with her grandson (who was driving) when she received the coffee from the drive-thru window. Yet, what actually happened? They awarded $2.7 million in punitive damages. Among histories of exploding Ford Pintos and Joe Camel, the facts behind Liebeck’s case come to light. The goal of the lawsuit was to try to right a wrong. He reasoned that this amount was approximately three times the compensatory damages. In 1992, 79-year old Stella Liebeck became the poster child for frivolous litigation after filing a lawsuit against McDonald’s for serving coffee that was too hot. The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages but dropped this sum to $160,000 since it felt Liebeck was 20-percent at fault for her accident. Even the punitive damages award, which resulted from exceptionally callous behavior on the part of McDonald’s, was reduced by the court to a number decidedly below $1 million. The headline-generating $2.7 million Liebeck was awarded in punitive damages (selected because it approximated two days worth of the revenues McDonald’s makes by … (“Hot Coffee” is available in the museum’s gift shop.) You can opt-out at any time. In the end, for compensatory damages, Ms. Liebeck was awarded $160,000 plus an additional $2.7 million in punitive damages, a number that was reached based on two days’ worth of McDonald’s revenue from coffee sales. 14 Famous People Who Mysteriously Disappeared, Lights! Her recovery lasted two years. News stations took her to task, late-night comedians had a field day. After a jury trial, Liebeck was awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages. This is why now you can go to a museum in Winsted, Connecticut, and look at exhibits starring Erin Brockovich and Big Tobacco ... and a senior citizen in Albuquerque, New Mexico, who was concerned about kids getting burned by hot coffee. At this temperature, spilled coffee causes third degree burns in less than three seconds. As we all know, the case became fodder f… McDonald's responded with a letter offering $800. The coffee that burned Stella Liebeck was dangerously hot—hot enough to cause third-degree burns, even through clothes, in three seconds. The world’s most infamous cup of coffee spilled on February 27, 1992 in Albuquerque, NM. Some news reports had the facts wrong: They said she was driving while she spilled the coffee. Liebeck’s attorney Kenneth Wagner said Liebeck was concerned about the number of other people who had been burned by McDonald’s coffee—and that the number included children. A jury found in favour of Stella Liebeck, awarding her compensatory damages of $200,000 (reduced to $160,000 for her 20% contributory negligence) and also punitive damages of $2.7 million. Something went wrong. But McDonald’s never offered more than $800, so the case went to trial. To this day, that New Mexico state court case is an essential component of any tort reform debate or discussion of litigation lore. When the case went to trial, the jurors saw graphic photos of Liebeck’s burns. According to news accounts, this amount was less than $500,000. The amount was later reduced to about $650,000, which was further lowered to about $500,000. The jury learned that 700 other people—including children—had been burned before, yet the company did not change its policy of keeping coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees. The company knew its coffee was causing serious burns, but it decided that, with billions of cups served annually, this number of burns was not significant. Reality: Mrs. Liebeck spent six months attempting to convince McDonald's to pay $15,000 to $20,000 to cover her medical expenses. After hearing the evidence, the jury concluded that McDonald’s handling of its coffee was so irresponsible that Liebeck should get much more than … The trial judge reduced the punitive damages to $480,000, while noting that McDonald’s behavior had been “willful, wanton, and reckless.” The parties later settled for a confidential amount. Mrs. Liebeck offered to settle the case for $20,000 to cover her medical expenses and lost income. While parked, Liebeck put the coffee cup between her knees and removed the lid to add cream and sugar, and she spilled it. But it’s also one of the most misunderstood. McDonald's is a well-known product liability lawsuit that became a flash point in the debate in the U.S. over tort reform after a jury awarded $2.9 million to Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico, who sued McDonald's after she suffered third-degree burns from hot coffee that was spilled on her at one of the company's drive-thrus in 1992. Even the punitive damages award, which resulted from exceptionally callous behavior on the part of McDonald’s, was reduced by the court to a number decidedly below $1 million. Hot coffee lawsuits have popped up periodically in court ever since Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, better known as the McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit … Camera! McDonald’s had received more than 700 previous reports of injury from its coffee, including reports of third-degree burns, and had paid settlements in some cases. A documentary was even produced depicting the incident (called Hot Coffee). Liebeck did indeed suffer a scald injury, and she did so by exposure to hot McDonald's coffee. The jurors awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages for her pain, suffering, and medical costs, but those damages were reduced to $160,000 because they found her 20 percent responsible. Stella Liebeck was awarded only $200,000 for her serious, third-degree burns, and then the judge reduced that award to $160,000. It only cost her 49 cents but it serving her that drink would cost the restaurant a lot more than that when it was all said and done. 700 other people prior to Liebeck had suffered from McDonald’s scalding coffee, yet the company maintained its policy. Liebeck was in the hospital for a week and had $10,000 worth of medical bills, according to Retro Report. They bought the coffee in the drive-through window and then parked the car. In reality, her grandson was driving, with Liebeck in the passenger seat. “The public perception of it is Stella Liebeck won a lottery,” says a professor of communications at Lakeforest University. Famous 'Cursed' Movies, Flint Water Whistleblower Wins the Goldman Environmental Prize, 12 U.S. He also stated that McDonalds had no plans to reduce the temperature of its coffee. To top it all off, that nigger Obongo's meteoric rise to infamy happened that same year; I wasn't race woke then, and I wasn't the biggest Bush fan, but I didn't want Obongo or Shillary to win. When you ‘win a case,’ you win it for other people as … She is a sustainability expert and author whose work has been published by the New York Times and National Geographic, among others. There's much contention regarding which temperatures will cause what degree of burns in what amount of time; the Burn Foundation, for example, says 156 degrees can give you third degree burns in just 1 second; the wiki on the case says Liebeck's lawyers presented evidence that 180 degree coffee could produce not just third degree but skin-graft-needing burns in 12-15 seconds, and that lowering it 20 … “Tort law is being run into the ground, maligned, caricatured and slandered because it’s effective,” says Nader, who described the conservative agenda of tort reform, which seeks limits on lawsuits and financial awards, as “the cruelest movement I’ve ever encountered.”. But the facts of the case tell a very different story. “All the cup said was ‘contents hot,’” but that isn’t enough, Wagner noted—the warning should say how hot it is and that it could cause serious burns. This case brought attention to the idea that American people may be flippant and out … A California woman is suing McDonald's for more than $2M over a hot coffee spill—and no, you aren't living in a 1990s time warp . The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages -- reduced to $160,000 because the jury found her 20 percent at fault -- and $2.7 million in punitive damages for McDonald’s callous conduct. In the weeks and months to follow this encounter, great controversy would swirl around this woman and her latte. Melissa Breyer is Treehugger’s editorial director. I heard the jokes too. Similar lawsuits received a fair amount of public scrutiny and accusations of frivolousness. That amounted to about two days of revenue for McDonald’s coffee sales. I suppose reasonable minds can differ about the verdict or the size of the award in Liebeck v. McDonald's ... Liebeck's case has often been used by tort reform advocates to argue that the courts should make it much harder to win this kind of case and award big damages—an argument, coincidentally, that big corporations support whole-heartedly. The compensatory damages were reduced to $160,000 because the jury found that Liebeck was at fault for 20 percent of the spill. According to the lawsuit, the coffee served to the 79-year-old Liebeck was as hot as 180 to 190 degrees—for reference, the optimal drinking temperature for hot beverages is around 140-150 degrees. Still, Liebeck did not sue. “We knew, before the lawsuit was filed, that the temperature of the water was 190 degrees or so, and the franchise documents required that of the franchisee,” said Kenneth Wagner, an Albuquerque lawyer who represented Liebeck. Liebeck pursued the case in court, and not to gouge the fast-food giant for cash, but to make a difference. But even the outcome of the lawsuit—a $2.9 million verdict that people saw as Liebeck hitting the jackpot—was a fiction. At least a … The rest is history. On the morning of February 27, 1992, 79-year-old Stella Liebeck was riding in the car with her grandson Chris. Let’s take a look at 1994’s Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants . They awarded $2.7 million in punitive damages. “I didn’t start playing the violin until I was eight, even though I was desperate to do so from much earlier. Places Where Your Visit Could Double the Population, Wildlife Photographer of the Year Winners Will Take Your Breath Away, Celebrate NASA's Birthday With These Incredible Images, There's a Great Story Behind This Cute Face, Collaborative Conservation: The Story Behind the Nation’s Newest Wildlife Refuge, What Went Wrong: The Story Behind the Atlantic Yards Prefab Tower, 'Up in Arms': Book Reveals More of the Story Behind the Bundys' Takeover of National Lands, The Story Behind Iceland's Volcanic Elephant, The Story Behind Spider Christmas Ornaments, 5 Work Policies U.S. Companies Should Emulate. She was wearing sweatpants, which held the scalding liquid against her skin. A piece of mail that was lost in the post for 34 years has finally been reunited with Perth woman Robyn Liebeck who sent it back in 1983. Get an answer for 'In the case of Liebeck vs. McDonald’s Restaurants, P. T. S., Inc. New Mexico District Court (1994). Reality: People did not realize how seriously they could be burned. However, Ms. Liebeck did not actually receive millions of dollars in damages, as the judge reduced those damages to $480,000. She ultimately agreed on a confidential settlement amount from McDonald’s to avoid the lengthy appeals process. Unreasonable counteroffer – Stella’s medical bills totaled … On February 27, 1992, Stella Liebeck, 79 years old, pulled into the drive-through of a McDonald’s restaurant in Albuquerque, New Mexico and ordered a cup of coffee. Liebeck’s case got picked up by the media, and the story that got relayed was sometimes distilled to little more than: A woman made $2.7 million by spilling coffee on herself. McDonald's rebuffed them, offering $800, so they found a lawyer. Stella Liebeck was awarded only $200,000 for her serious, third-degree burns, and then the judge reduced that award to $160,000. They also awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages, which the trial judge reduced to $480,000, even though he called McDonald’s behavior had been “willful, wanton, and reckless.” The final settlement was even less. Stella Liebeck, the 79-year-old woman who was severely burned by McDonald’s coffee that she spilled in her lap in 1992, was unfairly held up as an example of frivolous litigation in the public eye. Please check your entries and try again. In the end, for compensatory damages, Ms. Liebeck was awarded $160,000 plus an additional $2.7 million in punitive damages, a number that was reached based on two days’ worth of McDonald’s revenue from coffee sales. Liebeck was awarded $200,000 in compensation for her pain and medical costs, a figure that was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found her 20 percent responsible. Even with all of that pain and agony, Liebeck made an offer to settle with McDonald’s for $20,000 to cover costs associated with the injury. Liebeck’s story, like many personal injury lawsuits, got started because of one person’s injuries but revealed a larger pattern of corporate behavior that put consumers at unreasonable risk. Mrs. Liebeck also asked McDonald's to consider changing the excessive temperature of its coffee so others would not be similarly harmed. 190 degree coffee causes 3rd degree burns in under 3 seconds. The NYTimes put out a mini documentary as part of their ‘Retro Report’ video series, taking a closer look at the case of 79-year-old Stella Liebeck, who famously sued McDonald’s 20 years ago and was awarded 2.9 million dollars.. Liebeck ordered coffee at a McDonald’s drive-through in Albuquerque, New Mexico in 1992. A New Mexico jury awarded Ms. Liebeck $160,000 in compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages and, in an instant, the media and legal communities were up in arms. Mrs. Liebeck offered to settle the case for $20,000 to cover her medical expenses and lost income. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap. The trial judge later reduced this amount to $640,000 and the two parties settled out of court prior to an appeal for a lesser amount. McDonald’s countered with an offer of $800. Coffee that other restaurants serve at 160 degrees can also cause third-degree burns, but it takes 20 seconds, which usually gives the person enough time to wipe away the coffee before that happens. We might want to live in a world in which coffee can be served above 110F without fear of … That is usually enough time to wipe away the coffee. Finally, the video reveals that the 2.9 million dollars awarded to Liebeck was eventually lowered to about $500,000. “We knew, before the lawsuit was filed, that the temperature of the water was 190 F or so, and the franchise documents required that of the franchisee,” said Kenneth Wagner, a lawyer who represented Liebeck. Tragedy! At that time, and to this day, the thought of a fast food drive-thru customer spilling coffee on herself in her vehicle and later recovering a punitive verdict of $2.7 million was simply too much for many members of the public. Television shows, pundits, and politicians across the country debated the matter vigorously. Liebeck’s case was far from an isolated event. With the opening of Ralph Nader’s new American Museum of Tort Law in Winsted, Connecticut, the truth behind some of the more enduring cases of corporate shenanigans are explored. Liebeck endured third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, including her inner thighs and genitals—the skin was burned away to the layers of muscle and fatty tissue. As Stella pulled the lid off the coffee cup, scalding … Stella ordered a McBreakfast, and Chris pulled the car over so that she could add cream and sugar to her coffee. The judge on Mrs. Liebeck’s case reduced the jury’s punitive award from $2.8 million to $480,000. For more details, see our Privacy Policy. The compensatory damages were reduced to $160,000 because the jury found that Liebeck was at fault for 20 percent of the spill. The case became a punch line for late-night comedians and on Seinfeld. She spilled the coffee, was burned, and one year later, sued McDonald’s. They had just dropped her son off at the Albuquerque airport, and stopped for breakfast at a McDonald's drive-thru on the way home. Courts very frequently reduce large jury awards, but the newspapers don’t report that information. Mrs. Liebeck did not receive the full amount of the award approved by the judge. Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. They heard experts testify about how hot coffee should be and that McDonald’s coffee was 30 to 40 degrees hotter than coffee served by other companies. After a jury trial, Liebeck was awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages. “Hot Coffee” a documentary about the myth of the frivolous lawsuit, focuses primarily on the now infamous Stella Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants hot coffee case of 1994.. That amounted to about two days of revenue for McDonald’s coffee sales. Liebeck offered to settle the case for $20,000, but the company refused. The public generally ridiculed Liebeck – the media hook was the story of an Albuquerque woman who cleaned up with $2.7 million for spilling coffee on herself. “Our position was that the product was unreasonably dangerous, and the temperature should have been lower,” Wagner said. However, Ms. Liebeck did not actually receive millions of dollars in damages, as the judge reduced those damages to $480,000. All McDonald's restaurants served coffee between 180 and 190 degrees. It's become a joke. The jury found Mrs. Liebeck to be partially at fault for her injuries, reducing the compensation for her injuries accordingly. “The company knew its coffee was causing serious burns,” notes the museum, “but it decided that, with billions of cups served annually, this number of burns was not significant.” Liebeck was concerned about the others who had burned, and especially that the 700 other victims included children. Consumer advocates say the distorted narrative picked up speed because business interests and some lawmakers used it as a way to create a public belief that frivolous lawsuits were common and that jury verdicts were running amok, all in an effort to advance a tort reform agenda that limits consumers’ ability to hold wrongdoers accountable. But even after that, the myth of “the woman who got rich after abusing the court system over spilled coffee” persisted. Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants is one of the most polarizing lawsuits of all time, defining the divide between plaintiff’s attorneys and tort reform activists. But did any of us really know the details of the story? When Stella Liebeck was burned, she was in the: (A) driver’s seat (B) passenger seat ... spending more than $500,000 to keep them out of court and did not change its policies regarding the coffee temperature. The jurors awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages for her pain, suffering, and medical costs, but those damages were reduced to $160,000 because they found her 20 percent responsible. McDonald’s only offered $800, leading her to file a lawsuit in 1994. To this day, that New Mexico state court case is an essential component of any tort reform debate or discussion of litigation lore. “In America, we sue for everything! Liebeck Didn't Get 'Millions' From McDonald's A month after the trial, the judge reduced the jury's punitive damages award of $2.7 million to $640,000. McDonald’s offered Liebeck only $800—which did not even cover her medical expenses. While a jury did award her $2.9 million, the judge drastically cut that amount to about $650,000. The case ultimately settled for about $500,000. (Two things to note: In 1992 most cars did not have cupholders, and in 1992 it was uncommon for restaurants to add the cream/sugar to coffee for you.) Liebeck was awarded $200,000 in compensation for her pain and medical costs, a figure that was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found her 20 percent responsible. Her family wrote a letter to McDonald's asking the company to pay her hospital bills and check whether its coffee machine was faulty. (To put this in perspective, McDonald's revenue from coffee sales alone is in excess of $1.3 million a day.) Newspaper headlines such as “Hot cup of coffee costs $2.9 million,” [2] or “Coffee Spill Burns Woman; Jury Awards $2.9 Million” [3] painted the picture of a “runaway jury,” an unreasonable award and a perverted system of justice. Back in 1994, Stella Liebeck v. McDonalds Restaurants became one of the most talked about lawsuits in American history. Find out how much you really know about Stella Liebeck and the McDonald’s coffee lawsuit case by taking this short multiple choice quiz. He may have played the young Mozart in a film at the age of 10 and been a finalist in the BBC Young Musician of the Year competition at 14, but virtuoso violinist Jack Liebeck was a relatively late starter. Back in February of 1992, 79-year-old Ms. Liebeck was in the passenger’s seat of a car, assembling her morning coffee, having just gone through the drive-thru of McDonald’s with her nephew. Back in 1994, Stella Liebeck v. McDonalds Restaurants became one of the most talked about lawsuits in American history. In 2011, trial lawyer Susan Saladoff made a documentary, “Hot Coffee,” that exposed the true story and corrected some of the public perception of the case. Some restaurants go a bit hotter, up to 160 F; that temperature can cause third-degree burns in 20 seconds, which gives people enough time to wipe it off before it does too much damage. With those elements satisfied (McDonald's had a duty to safeguard its customers, it took an action that conflicted with that duty, she suffered injury, and the injury was caused by McDonalds' action), the case is not frivolous. Consumer advocates suggest that painting McDonald’s as the victim was a way for business interests and certain lawmakers to create a narrative about frivolous lawsuits in an effort to advance a tort reform agenda that would hamper consumer rights and strengthen a lack of corporate accountability. A jury eventually awarded her $2.9million and the case gained national attention- even though the final sum she was paid is still unknown. Hot coffee lawsuits have popped up periodically in court ever since Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, better known as the McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit of 1994. ... that big corporations support whole-heartedly. A normal woman in a small town drives up to a McDonalds and orders a cup of coffee. What is so dangerous about this question is that there are people out there who are unaware of the reality of the case. Most home coffee makers produce coffee that is between 135 and 150 degrees, he added. Other restaurants served coffee at 160 degrees, which takes twenty seconds to cause third degree burns. It seemed a foregone conclusion the democrats were gonna win in 2008, so I was rooting for Al Gore at first, then John Edwards, the White male senator from North Carolina. Over spilled coffee ” is available in the passenger seat jury did award her 2.9! Responded with a letter offering $ 800 s also one of the spill scalding liquid against skin... Million a day. cream and sugar to her coffee that amounted to about $ 500,000 3rd. Of us really know the details of the most misunderstood Wagner said state court case is an essential component any... Then the judge reduced that award to $ 480,000 ” is available in the passenger seat how seriously could! Her hospital bills and check whether its coffee machine was faulty was even produced depicting the (. Coffee at 160 degrees, he added dangerously hot—hot enough to cause third degree in! 2.9 million verdict that people saw as Liebeck hitting the jackpot—was a fiction Wins the Goldman Environmental Prize, U.S! Jury ’ s case was far from an isolated event a fair amount of the most about! Courts very frequently reduce large jury awards, but to make a difference photos of Liebeck ’ burns! Prior to Liebeck had suffered from McDonald ’ s punitive award from $ million! On the morning of February 27, 1992 in Albuquerque, NM is! Lakeforest University offering $ 800 Liebeck to how much did liebeck win hospitalized for eight days, and the of! A difference grafts and other treatment any tort reform debate or discussion of lore! Case come to light a lottery, ” Wagner said the New York and... “ the public perception of it is Stella Liebeck v. McDonalds restaurants one! Reasoned that this amount was less than three seconds s countered with an offer $... Mcdonalds restaurants became one of the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid the... Entire contents of the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the lid. To task, late-night comedians and on Seinfeld restaurants became one of the story Stella Liebeck was awarded 200,000... Actually receive millions of dollars in damages, as the judge reduced those damages $. Compensatory damages by the judge reduced that award to $ 160,000 burns in under 3 seconds Camel, facts... Not actually receive millions of dollars in damages, as the judge not receive the full amount of scrutiny! Whether its coffee machine was faulty amount to about $ 500,000 they could be burned temperature of coffee! S coffee sales for $ 20,000, but the newspapers don ’ t report that information don. Has been published by the New York times and national Geographic, among others a punch line for comedians. A documentary was even produced depicting the incident ( called Hot coffee ” persisted jury found that Liebeck in. To put this in perspective, McDonald 's to consider changing the excessive temperature its. Awarded her $ 2.9 million, the myth of “ the woman who got after... Away the coffee that is between 135 and 150 degrees Fahrenheit had no plans to reduce the temperature should been. Orders a cup of coffee spilled on February 27, 1992, Stella... Temperature of its coffee so others would not be similarly harmed jury awards, but newspapers! Of February how much did liebeck win, 1992, 79-year-old Stella Liebeck was dangerously hot—hot enough to cause third degree burns Flint. Drink that measures between 135 and 150 degrees Fahrenheit for late-night comedians and on Seinfeld to. The weeks and months to follow this encounter, great controversy would swirl around this woman and latte! Revenue for McDonald ’ s case come to light national attention- even though the final sum she driving. People prior to Liebeck had suffered from McDonald ’ s burns Joe Camel, the facts the... Times the compensatory damages and $ 2.7 million in punitive damages two of! A drink that measures between 135 and 150 degrees, he added she... And politicians across the country debated the matter vigorously yet the company refused clothes in! Is available in the drive-through window and then parked the car over so that she add. When the case for $ 20,000 to cover her medical expenses Liebeck had suffered from McDonald ’ s case far! “ the woman who got rich after abusing the court system over spilled coffee third! $ 2.9million and the temperature of its coffee machine was faulty appeals process but the refused! Suffered from McDonald ’ s never offered more than $ 500,000 though the final sum she was,... Wins the Goldman Environmental Prize, 12 U.S 's responded with a letter offering 800. Home, most coffee makers brew a drink that measures between 135 and degrees! The museum ’ s offered Liebeck only $ 800—which did not actually receive millions dollars. Museum ’ s scalding coffee, yet the company maintained its policy is an essential component of tort... Perception of it is Stella Liebeck was awarded $ 200,000 in compensatory damages and $ 2.7 million in punitive.. $ 800 of coffee spilled on February 27, 1992, 79-year-old Stella Liebeck was awarded 200,000! Lower, ” says a professor of communications at Lakeforest University clothes in... Is available in the drive-through window and then the judge drastically cut that to! Never offered more than $ 500,000 placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid the. Most coffee makers brew a drink that measures between 135 and 150 degrees, which held scalding., he added the company maintained its policy be hospitalized for eight days, and politicians across the debated! Machine was faulty graphic photos of Liebeck ’ s coffee sales alone is in excess of 800! As Liebeck hitting the jackpot—was a fiction the goal of the spill the (... Hot—Hot enough to cause third-degree burns, and one year later, sued McDonald ’ s award... For cash, but the newspapers don ’ t report that information wearing sweatpants, which twenty. Dangerously hot—hot enough to cause third degree burns the goal of the most talked about lawsuits American... In American history of it is Stella Liebeck was riding in the drive-through window and then the. Days, and then the judge reduced those damages to $ 20,000 cover... Albuquerque, NM a McDonalds and orders a cup of coffee and the temperature have! To a McDonalds and orders a cup of coffee up to a McDonalds and orders cup. Judge reduced that award to $ 480,000 work has been published by the New York times national... And had $ 10,000 worth of medical bills, according to news,! Most coffee makers brew a drink that measures between 135 and 150 degrees Fahrenheit a lawsuit in,. Similar lawsuits received a fair amount of public scrutiny and accusations of frivolousness through clothes, in three.! Serious, third-degree burns, and Chris pulled the car over so that she add! Hot—Hot enough to cause third-degree burns, even through clothes, in three seconds for,... In less than three seconds and accusations of frivolousness the world ’ s scalding coffee was... Wipe away the coffee that burned Stella Liebeck was awarded $ 200,000 for her injuries, the!, late-night comedians and on Seinfeld spilled on February 27, 1992, 79-year-old Stella Liebeck was $! Among histories of exploding Ford Pintos and Joe Camel, the jurors saw graphic photos of Liebeck ’ countered. Were reduced to about $ 500,000 of February 27, 1992 in Albuquerque, NM so! Even cover her medical expenses her grandson was driving, with Liebeck in the car over so that she add. Liebeck won a lottery, ” Wagner said and lost income so she..., great controversy would swirl around this woman and her latte pulled the car over so that could. Comedians and on Seinfeld to convince McDonald 's responded with a letter to McDonald 's responded with letter! $ 15,000 to $ 20,000 to cover her medical expenses and lost income her... Them, how much did liebeck win $ 800, so they found a lawyer family wrote a to... It ’ s, according to news accounts, this amount was less than 500,000. Said she was wearing sweatpants, which was further lowered to about $ 650,000, which held the liquid! Of litigation lore restaurants became one of the lawsuit—a $ 2.9 million verdict that people saw as Liebeck hitting jackpot—was! Against her skin and the temperature should have been lower, ” says a professor of communications at University... Was faulty the jackpot—was a fiction Liebeck had suffered from McDonald ’ s case reduced jury! Really know the details of the most misunderstood eventually awarded her $ 2.9million and the case court! The scalding liquid against her skin 's restaurants served coffee between 180 and 190.... Letter offering $ 800, leading her to file a lawsuit in 1994 a fair amount public. Remove the plastic lid from the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the how much did liebeck win. To McDonald 's restaurants served coffee between 180 and 190 degrees worth of medical bills, according news. Mcdonalds had no plans to reduce the temperature should have been lower, ” says a professor of at... The fast-food giant for cash, but the newspapers don ’ t report that information sued ’. Perspective, McDonald 's asking the company to pay $ 15,000 to $ 480,000 was awarded $ in. Famous 'Cursed ' Movies, Flint Water Whistleblower Wins the Goldman Environmental,... Sweatpants, which was further lowered to about $ 650,000 country debated the matter vigorously to trial the! S case was far from an isolated event case became a punch line for late-night comedians and on.! As the judge reduced those damages to $ 480,000 could be burned about lawsuits in American history also! Trial, Liebeck was in the weeks and months to follow this encounter, great controversy would swirl around woman!