In February 1992, 79-year-old Stella Liebeck purchased a cup of coffee at a McDonald's drive-through in Albuquerque, New Mexico. While parked, she spilled the coffee on her lap, sustaining third-degree burns over 6% of her body requiring skin grafts and hospitalization. McDonald's had served coffee at 180–190°F (82–88°C), far hotter than home-brewed coffee. McDonald's had received over 700 prior burn complaints over a decade but maintained the temperature policy. The jury awarded $200,000 compensatory damages (reduced to $160,000 for comparative fault) and $2.7 million punitive damages (later reduced by the judge to $480,000). The parties ultimately settled for an undisclosed amount.
McDonald's Internal Burn Complaint Records
Over 700 prior complaints of coffee burns filed between 1982 and 1992, obtained through discovery. McDonald's quality assurance manager Christopher Appleton acknowledged the complaints during deposition but testified they represented a statistically insignificant fraction of the billions of cups sold. Internal memos show the QA department reviewed burn reports quarterly but recommended no corrective action on serving temperature. At least 14 prior complaints involved third-degree burns. Defense will argue under FRE 403 that the volume of prior complaints is unfairly prejudicial and misleads the jury into thinking frequency equals defectiveness; plaintiff argues it establishes notice and deliberate indifference under product liability theory.
McDonald's Temperature Policy Document
Corporate operations manual requiring coffee served at 180–190°F (82–88°C), based on recommendations from McDonald's own beverage consultants who determined this temperature range optimizes flavor extraction and customer satisfaction for drive-through consumption (accounting for cooling time during transport). The policy was standardized across all 14,000+ U.S. locations. McDonald's argues this demonstrates a deliberate, researched business decision — not negligence. The document also contains internal talking points: "Customers expect premium hot coffee. Our competitors serve at similar temperatures." Defense presents this to show industry-standard practice and informed corporate decision-making, not reckless disregard.
Medical Records and Photographs
Documentation of third-degree burns covering 6% of body surface area (inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and groin), including clinical photographs showing full-thickness tissue destruction. Treatment records: 8 days hospitalization at Presbyterian Hospital, debridement of necrotic tissue, multiple skin graft surgeries, 2-year recovery period including physical therapy for scar contracture. Permanent scarring documented at 16% disfigurement rating. Dr. Charles Baxter (burns specialist, Parkland Memorial Hospital) provided expert opinion that these injuries are consistent with contact of liquid at approximately 180°F for 3-5 seconds and would have been vastly less severe at 155°F or below. Plaintiff was 79 years old, with age-thinned skin increasing vulnerability to thermal injury.
Expert Report on Burn Injury Thresholds
Thermodynamics expert report establishing: at 180°F, full-thickness (third-degree) burns occur within 2–7 seconds of skin contact; at 160°F, the same injury requires approximately 20 seconds; at 140°F, serious burns are unlikely even with prolonged exposure. Home coffee makers typically produce coffee at 135–140°F; restaurants serving for immediate consumption commonly serve at 155–160°F. The 180–190°F policy placed McDonald's coffee 30–50°F above the typical dine-in restaurant standard. The report concludes that the "extra-hot" policy created a foreseeable, unreasonable risk of severe injury with no meaningful consumer benefit (coffee is too hot to drink at 180°F and must cool regardless). Defense challenges the report under Daubert, arguing the expert's comparisons are misleading because drive-through customers expect hotter coffee to account for transport cooling.
Pre-Litigation Settlement Correspondence
Liebeck's initial demand letter (August 1992) requesting $20,000 to cover medical bills and lost income for her daughter (caretaker). McDonald's counter-offer: $800. Court-ordered mediation (1993): mediator recommended $225,000 settlement; McDonald's refused. The escalation from a $20,000 request to a $2.86 million jury verdict is presented to show McDonald's intransigence and disregard for the injured party. Defense will argue this entire exhibit is inadmissible under FRE 408 (compromise offers and negotiations) and that showing the jury a rejected settlement creates unfair prejudice by suggesting McDonald's was unreasonable when they were simply exercising their legal right to go to trial.
Dr. Charles Baxter (Plaintiff's Burn Expert)
Burns specialist at Parkland Memorial Hospital, Dallas
The burns Mrs. Liebeck sustained are consistent with prolonged contact with liquid at approximately 180°F. These are severe third-degree burns requiring grafting. Coffee at this temperature is unreasonably dangerous.
McDonald's Quality Assurance Manager
McDonald's corporate representative on beverage standards
Our customers want hot coffee. We have sold billions of cups of coffee. The prior complaints represent a very small fraction of our sales volume, and we believe customers understand that coffee is hot.
Stella Liebeck (Plaintiff)
79-year-old retired department store clerk, Albuquerque, NM
I was sitting in the parked car and placed the cup between my knees to add cream. It tipped and spilled across my lap. I had no idea coffee could cause this kind of burn. I just wanted my medical bills covered.
Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants (1994)
Choose a role to start
🔒 Subscriber Only
