Unit 3 Written Assignment
What was the basis of her claim against McDonald's?
On February of 1992, Stella Liebeck, 79 years old, bought a cup of coffee through the drive-thru of McDonald’s restaurant in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The hot coffee was served in a Styrofoam cup and cost 49 cents. Stella’s grandson, Chris, who was driving the car pulled into the parking space so that she could pour cream and sugar to her coffee. Once in the parking space, the old lady was trying to remove the lid when the hot coffee spilled over her lap burning her inner thighs, groin, and buttocks. At the time of the accident the lady war wearing sweatpants, and this did not protect from the hot coffee. She was hospitalized for more than a week and the doctors determined that Stella got third-degree burns on the parts of the body that the hot coffee got in contact. The burns left her with permanent disfigurement, weight loss, and disability (Rosenfeld, 2015).
Stella demanded McDonald's the amount of $20,000 to cover her medical bills and hospitalization. However, McDonald refused to pay her and offered a worthless sum of $800. She decided to take the case to the courts. During the discovery process, several facts were discovered. In fact, Ms. Liebeck’s case only one of the several reports of injury from McDonald's coffee. Mcdonald had already paid …show more content…
In a strict liability, companies are accountable for defective designs, lack of warning or caution labels. Manufacturers must warn its customers against the risks posed by using their product (Lou & Johnson, 2011, pg. 235). In Stella Liebeck’s case, the coffee was served at a temperature of 180-190 degrees. The product had no warning of the risks or how to handle properly. “McDonald's coffee spilled, could cause full-thickness burns ( the third degree to the muscle/fatty tissue layer) in 2 to 7 seconds” (James,
What was the basis of her claim against McDonald's?
On February of 1992, Stella Liebeck, 79 years old, bought a cup of coffee through the drive-thru of McDonald’s restaurant in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The hot coffee was served in a Styrofoam cup and cost 49 cents. Stella’s grandson, Chris, who was driving the car pulled into the parking space so that she could pour cream and sugar to her coffee. Once in the parking space, the old lady was trying to remove the lid when the hot coffee spilled over her lap burning her inner thighs, groin, and buttocks. At the time of the accident the lady war wearing sweatpants, and this did not protect from the hot coffee. She was hospitalized for more than a week and the doctors determined that Stella got third-degree burns on the parts of the body that the hot coffee got in contact. The burns left her with permanent disfigurement, weight loss, and disability (Rosenfeld, 2015).
Stella demanded McDonald's the amount of $20,000 to cover her medical bills and hospitalization. However, McDonald refused to pay her and offered a worthless sum of $800. She decided to take the case to the courts. During the discovery process, several facts were discovered. In fact, Ms. Liebeck’s case only one of the several reports of injury from McDonald's coffee. Mcdonald had already paid …show more content…
In a strict liability, companies are accountable for defective designs, lack of warning or caution labels. Manufacturers must warn its customers against the risks posed by using their product (Lou & Johnson, 2011, pg. 235). In Stella Liebeck’s case, the coffee was served at a temperature of 180-190 degrees. The product had no warning of the risks or how to handle properly. “McDonald's coffee spilled, could cause full-thickness burns ( the third degree to the muscle/fatty tissue layer) in 2 to 7 seconds” (James,