The McDonald's hot coffee case is held up as a symbol of greedy plaintiffs and runaway verdicts. The popular version -- a woman spilled her own coffee and cashed in -- gets almost every fact wrong. Here is what the trial record actually showed.
How the Burns Happened
In 1992, a 79-year-old woman bought coffee at a McDonald's drive-thru with her grandson. He parked the car. While the vehicle was stopped, she placed the cup between her knees to add cream and sugar and removed the lid. The coffee spilled, soaked through her sweatpants, and caused second- and third-degree burns to her inner thighs.
She was hospitalized for eight days, underwent skin grafts, and needed in-home care for three weeks -- care her daughter provided while losing income. Full recovery took two years and left her with lasting impairments.
She Tried to Settle First
Before filing suit, the plaintiff asked McDonald's to cover her medical bills and her daughter's lost wages -- $15,000 to $20,000 -- and to lower its coffee temperature to prevent future injuries. McDonald's offered $800 and would not move. After six months, she retained counsel. Even then, her attorney offered to settle for $90,000, and later the case was filed as Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants (Case No. D-202-CV-199302419) in 1993.
What the Trial Revealed
Over eight days of testimony, the evidence laid out the core problem:
- Temperature McDonald's policy required coffee served at 180 to 190 degrees, hot enough to cause third-degree burns in about three seconds. Other chains used 150 to 160 degrees; home coffee makers run 135 to 150 degrees, where burns take 20 seconds or more -- time to react.
- Prior knowledge At least 700 people, including children, had already suffered serious burns from McDonald's coffee. The company knew and did not change its policy.
- Inadequate warning The only label was "Hot contents," which did not convey the real risk.
The Verdict and Settlement
The jury awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages, reduced by 20% to $160,000 to reflect the plaintiff's own share of fault, plus $2.7 million in punitive damages -- roughly two days of McDonald's coffee sales. The judge reduced the punitive award to $480,000, and the parties later reached a confidential settlement reported to be just under $500,000. One juror explained that the punitive award answered McDonald's callous response to 700 reported injuries.
The lesson is not that coffee is dangerous. It is that a company can ignore hundreds of warnings until a jury makes it listen. A Louisiana injury lawyer holds that kind of conduct to account.
