Filtering Through The Coffee Case

By Halley B. Lewis III, Firm Partner

     Most of you have probably heard about the woman in New Mexico who received a jury verdict against McDonald's after having hot coffee spill in her lap. The verdict was for $160,000 plus punitive damages payable to her and the State of New Mexico for $2.7 million. Insurance companies and large corporations will cite this unusually large verdict as an example of "why our tort system needs reforming." There are some facts about this case, however, that everybody should be aware of before passing judgment.

     The McDonald's coffee was measured at 180 degrees Fahrenheit, which was more than hot enough to cause serious third-degree burns to the legs and groin area of the 81-year old female customer. She required several delicate skin grafts and was required to stay in the hospital for more than a week. Furthermore, the woman did not spill her coffee while driving, as was reported by McDonald's, but had simply pulled over after leaving the drive-thru and taken off the lid to pour in her cream and sugar. More importantly, it was discovered that McDonald's had received at least 700 prior complaints of coffee burns, and had still failed to take any action to correct the dangerous problem with their coffee.

     It was corporate policy at McDonald's to serve its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit, far hotter than any other restaurants and coffee brewed at home, which generally ranges from 135 to 140 degrees.

     At trial, the company's quality assurance manager testified that the company knew a burn hazard existed with any food substance served above 140 degrees. He admitted that the coffee, at the temperature it was poured into Styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat.

     The jury actually only awarded the woman $160,000 for her injuries, pain and suffering and medical expenses. The other $2.7 million — which equals about two days of McDonald's coffee sales — was awarded as punitive damages to "punish" McDonald's for violating industry standards and ignoring the 700 prior injuries. The punitive award was also intended to send McDonald's a message that it needs to change its policy.

     Upon further review, the judge has lowered the punitive damage award to $480,000 and a large part of the award will be to the state rather than the plaintiff. Regardless, McDonald's has apparently learned their lesson because their coffee is now served at only 150 degrees.