![]() ![]() The Liebeck case became a flashpoint in the debate in the United States over tort reform. ![]() ![]() The parties settled for a confidential amount before an appeal was decided. The trial judge reduced the punitive damages to three times the amount of the compensatory damages, totalling $640,000. They awarded Liebeck a net $160,000 in compensatory damages to cover medical expenses, and $2.7 million (equivalent to $5,000,000 in 2021) in punitive damages, the equivalent of two days of McDonald's coffee sales. The jury found that McDonald's was 80 percent responsible for the incident. Liebeck's attorneys argued that, at 180–190 ☏ (82–88 ☌), McDonald's coffee was defective, and more likely to cause serious injury than coffee served at any other establishment. District Court for the District of New Mexico, accusing McDonald's of gross negligence. When McDonald's refused, Liebeck's attorney filed suit in the U.S. Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for $20,000 to cover her medical expenses. She was hospitalized for eight days while undergoing skin grafting, followed by two years of medical treatment. The plaintiff, Stella Liebeck (1912–2004), a 79-year-old woman, suffered third-degree burns in her pelvic region when she accidentally spilled coffee in her lap after purchasing it from a McDonald's restaurant. McDonald's Restaurants, also known as the McDonald's coffee case and the hot coffee lawsuit, was a highly publicized 1994 product liability lawsuit in the United States against the McDonald's restaurant chain. and McDonald's International, Inc.ġ994 Extra LEXIS 23 ( Bernalillo County, N.M. For similar uses, see Hot Coffee (disambiguation). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |