Question

The McDonald's Coffee Lawsuit is a famous product liability/tort claim.

The basic story is that an elderly woman went through a McDonald's drive-thru, ordered coffee, and then spilled it on herself. The coffee burned her and she required medical attention. She turned around and sued McDonald's for the costs of her medical care as well as punitive and other damages. A jury awarded her about $3M in total. This case was widely panned in the national media as an example of frivolous litigation and why we need tort reform.

explain which side of this argument you fall on. I am looking for both the legal basis of your argument as well as any ethical/moral or other considerations that might persuade you in this instance.

Answer 1

In my opinion, The verdict is not correct and McDonald's should file an appeal to the higher authority.

Coffee is the product which is known to be served hot as people are definitely not going to enjoy it at lower temprature.

In general, It's customer responsibility to handle the product with care.

If there are damages due to negligence of customer then the company can not be held liable for the damages.

As the coffee is served on high temprature (even at our own house), the elderly women must take away it with care. and if she was unable to do so because of her age then she should request the staff to serve the coffee on her table.

Now, The coffee was not spilled on her because of staff negligence but it was spilled on her because of himself.

We can not blaim companies for everything relating to the product. One must have to use the product responsibly. If damages are done by the product even after taking all protective measures, then the company shall be help liable.

So, the verdict is not appropriate in both manners, legally and ethically.

I hope it will help you in the study.