Cream or Sugar-coated?

I like Dave Ramsey. We enjoy his financial message and [currently] attend Financial Peace University, motivating us to “Live like nobody else, so we can live like nobody else.” His program has helped millions of people conquer debt and dig themselves out of those [often] suffocating financial holes. Dave’s Town Hall for Hope was an excellent idea that will propel many Americans toward financial independence. However, I would be an accessory to an untruth if I did not stand up and say he fired me up early…

To illustrate a lack of personal responsibility, Dave cited the story of Stella Liebeck, the woman who spilled McDonald’s coffee on her lap and thereby "awarded millions" of dollars in a lawsuit. Ramsey mocked Liebeck by saying, “Who knew coffee would be hot?” before continuing to beat down what is considered by many to be the standard for frivolous lawsuits. It has been broken down on lectlaw.com, the source from which I drew the information below and also available via many sources. Therefore, all Dave or anyone else needs to do is...wait for it...RESEARCH. Most Americans are quick to criticize the media and occasionally for good reason. In the same breath, however, they are also quick to regurgitate and believe this shock-and-awe, ratings driven sound bite. Those telling this story, in order to drive home the evils of frivolous lawsuits, count on the ignorance of the listener. If you still think Ms. Liebeck is the profile of irresponsibility and stupidity, once you receive the facts of this particular case, then I would personally like to serve you your next cup of coffee.

Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson's car when she was severely burned by McDonalds' coffee in February 1992. Liebeck, 79 at the time, ordered coffee that was served in a styrofoam cup at the drive-through window of a local McDonalds. After receiving their order, her grandson pulled his car forward and stopped momentarily so that Liebeck could add cream and sugar to her coffee. Critics often charge that Liebeck was driving the car or that the vehicle was in motion when she spilled the coffee; neither is true. Liebeck placed the cup between her knees and attempted to remove the plastic lid from the cup. As she removed the lid, the entire contents of the cup spilled into her lap. The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee, holding it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting for the aforementioned areas. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim (having never sued anyone prior to this incident) for only $20,000 to cover medical bills accumulated as a result of the incident. McDonalds refused.

During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard. McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee between 180 and 190 degrees Fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste, admitting that they had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees. Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption, because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager confirmed that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds did not intend to reduce the "holding temperature" of its coffee.

The plaintiffs' expert, a scholar in thermodynamics applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids at 180 degrees will cause a full thickness burn to human skin within two to seven seconds. Another testimony revealed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn.

McDonalds asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there. However, the company’s own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving. McDonalds also argued that consumers know coffee is hot and that its customers want it that way. The company admitted its customers were unaware that they could suffer third degree burns from the coffee and that a statement on the side of the cup was not a warning, but a "reminder," since the location of the writing would not conveniently warn customers of the potential hazard.

The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages. This amount was reduced to $160,000 because the jury found Liebeck 20 percent at fault in the spill. The jury also awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, which equals about two days of McDonalds' coffee sales. Post-verdict investigation found that the temperature of coffee at the local Albuquerque McDonalds had dropped to 158 degrees Fahrenheit. The trial court subsequently reduced the punitive award to $480,000 -- or 3 times compensatory damages -- even though the judge called McDonalds' conduct reckless, callous and willful.

The parties eventually entered into a secret settlement (for presumably less money) that has never been revealed to the public, despite the fact that this was a public case, litigated in public and subjected to extensive media reporting. So, let this be a lesson to you silly, old women: learn some responsibility. Or, those looking to rant about responsibility and the frivolity of the legal system, should not speak until they know what they are talking about. Case closed.