If you’re from the United States, then you have probably heard of the fast food restaurant McDonald’s getting sued for their extremely hot coffee. In 1992, a 79-year-old women named Stella Liebeck spilled McDonald’s coffee on herself, causing her to be in the hospital for a week. After Stella wrote a letter to corporate, McDonald’s only wanted to give her $800 for her medical expenses. She took them to court and the jury ended up holding McDonald’s liable. The case received extensive media coverage. As a juror, I would have ruled in favor of Stella Liebeck. There were two main points on why I would have ruled in favor of Stella. They are because of the severity of her injuries and the claim that the coffee was too hot.
Stella Liebeck’s …show more content…
She suffered third degree burns that scarred over 16% of her body. This 16% included her genitals, buttocks, thighs, and groin area. She spent over a week in the hospital where she had to have a series of skin grafts. She was also partially disabled for around two years after the accident. A liquid that can cause severe injuries like this cup of McDonald’s coffee did, should not be served to customers. It is extremely dangerous as it proved to be for Stella Liebeck. At the time of spilling the coffee on herself, Stella went through the first stage of disputing, which is grievance or the preconflict stage (Lippman 212). She believed she had been wronged or injured and had to choose whether or not to confront McDonald’s or to just walk away. Stella could have either lumped or avoided the situation. Lumping it is when you decide to not pursue the grievance and just live with the situation. Avoidance is when you completely walk away from the situation and end the relationship with McDonald’s (Lippman 213). But because of the severity and $20,000 cost of Stella’s injuries, she decided to pursue McDonald’s wrong doing. When you have injuries to that extent, you really have no choice but to do …show more content…
McDonald’s manual for coffee temperatures states the coffee was to be served between 180 and 190 degrees. These high temperatures could potentially cause severe burns if the coffee wasn’t removed in seven seconds. Even though other restaurants served their coffee below the temperature of McDonald’s coffee, McDonald’s still maintained those high temperatures. McDonald’s had also received over seven hundred complaints on how hot their coffee was over the previous 10 years, yet had done nothing to resolve these issues. Stella’s burns could have been avoided if McDonald’s had owned up to their recklessness with their coffee in the previous 10 years. McDonald’s should have lowered the temperature of their coffee so it wasn’t dangerously hot to the point where it could cause severe injuries. People may argue that she should have been more careful when opening the lid. My argument is that the coffee should not be that hot to the point where you get severe third degree burns. After getting better, Stella wrote to McDonald’s telling them of her experience, asking that they check the temperatures of their coffee and if they would cover her medical expenses. This stage of dispute is called the conflict stage (Lippman 212). Stella confronted McDonald’s and asked for money for her medical bills to settle the dispute. McDonald’s rejected to change