Question

Between years 1982 and 1992, McDonalds has had more then 700 claims by people burned by its coffee, some claims involved thirddegree burns. Regardless, McDonald’s made no change to the temperature of their coffee. They were aware of this known risk! • 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. • The Plaintiff’s physician testified that this was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen. Other expert witnesses termed the risk of harm from McDonald’s coffee to be unacceptable. • A Psychologist testified that the addition of a warning to the McDonald’s coffee would have influenced The Plaintiff’s behavior. defend this legal claims

Answer 1

McDonald's 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.

The above statement indicated that the company was ignorant of the fact that the customers can get the burnt due to the very hot temperature of the coffee and despite that, they did not put the warning. This resulted in the negligence of duty of care. The company can defend by stating that in the normal course of action, the coffee is expected to be taken in a stationary position not while driving the car so the claims of the users to get burnt while driving states the carelessness on the behalf of the customers while using the product

The Plaintiff’s physician testified that this was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen. Other expert witnesses termed the risk of harm from McDonald’s coffee to be unacceptable.

This claim is related to the implied warranty of safety of the product" that indicates that the products consumed by the customers must be safe and should not result in any direct or indirect harm. The company can state that the level of burnt is not directly related to the very high temperature but the quantity of the coffee fell on the plaintiff which shows the carelessness on behalf of the customer

A Psychologist testified that the addition of a warning to the McDonald’s coffee would have influenced The Plaintiff’s behavior

The company can argue that there was no attempt of the company to change the behavior of the customer but to caution them and ask them to act in a way so that they do not get harmed