Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants (1994)
Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants (1994), known as the “hot coffee case,” was a product liability lawsuit where Stella Liebeck sued McDonald’s after suffering severe burns from coffee served at one of its New Mexico locations. A jury found McDonald’s liable for selling a dangerously hot product and awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages, reduced to $160,000 due to her 20% fault, and $2.7 million in punitive damages. The trial court later suggested reducing the punitive award to $480,000, but the case settled confidentially before the final judgment.
The case sparked public debate about tort reform. Critics saw it as an example of excessive litigation, often focusing on the size of the award and the fact that Liebeck spilled the coffee while trying to open the lid in her lap. Others noted that her burns were quite severe (requiring skin grafting and hospitalization), McDonald’s served coffee much hotter than competitors (at nearly 190 degrees), had prior similar complaints, and that Liebeck initially offered to settle for less than her medical costs. Many now view the case as misunderstood and misrepresented in the media.
[Last reviewed in July of 2025 by the Wex Definitions Team]
Wex