Woman Sues San Francisco McDonald’s After Being Burned by Hot Coffee

A San Francisco McDonald’s is being sued after a scalding cup of coffee caused “severe burns” on an elderly woman’s groin, a lawsuit alleges.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday in San Francisco Superior Court, claims McDonald’s employees at 1100 Fillmore St. “failed to properly secure the coffee cup lid,” which then opened when the woman, Mable Childress, tried to take a sip. The lid fell off, the coffee poured out of the cup, and Childress suffered third-degree burns to her groin, legs and abdomen, the suit alleges.

Childress, who is in her 80s, is seeking millions in compensation for the June incident, according to her lawyer, Dylan Hackett. The amount she could receive is listed as unlimited in court filings.

The suit claims the burns were bad enough to leave Childress with “emotional distress” and scarring on her groin area, where she “continues to experience pain.”

The lawsuit further alleges that the employees at the Fillmore McDonald’s refused to help Childress after she was burned and ignored her calls for help.

“She was standing there for quite some time, around 20 to 25 minutes, asking for a manager,” Hackett said.

Cars pull up to the drive-through at the Fillmore District McDonald's. | Source: Courtesy Google Street View

McDonald's representatives disputed this claim, however, stating that their employees and management "spoke to her within a few minutes and offered assistance."

“My restaurants have strict food safety protocols in place, including training crew to ensure lids on hot beverages are secure," McDonald’s owner and operator Peter Ou said in a statement. "We take every customer complaint seriously."

This isn’t the first time searing hot coffee caused a legal headache for the famed fast-food company.

A similar McDonald’s hot coffee incident happened in 1994, leading to the first coffee-related lawsuit against the fast-food magnate. A 79-year-old woman named Stella Liebeck bought takeout coffee in Albuquerque, which spilled on her lap and caused third-degree burns.

Initially, a jury offered her a cool $3 million in punitive damages for the incident. The case made headlines for its eye-watering damage award and sparked debates about frivolous or excessive lawsuits.

The original lawsuit also raised questions about how hot McDonald’s serves its coffee: At the time of the first incident, the restaurant chain served its coffee between 180 and 190 degrees, though it’s unclear if their average coffee temperatures were lowered after the lawsuit. Hackett claims the coffee that burned Childress was much hotter than 190 degrees.

Difficult-Ad628 on September 20th, 2023 at 08:20 UTC »

Interesting things about this:

As most of you know this has happened before in 1994. The motives of the woman who filed the original lawsuit have largely been questioned, thanks in part to a PR campaign by McDonalds to save face shortly after the lawsuit.

What a lot of people don’t know is that Stella Liebeck’s injuries were exacerbated due to the fact that she could not get her pants off in a timely manner. This kept the scalding hot coffee pressed against her skin which caused several 3rd degree burns across approximately 40% of her lower body. She needed several grafts to repair the damage to her skin.

Liebeck’s medical expenses came to $13,000, and her daughter lost wages equal to roughly $5,000 while she tended to her mother. Initially, Liebeck sought to settle with McDonalds for $20,000; an offer which McDonalds rejected. Stella Liebeck did not seek $2.7 million, that amount is simply what was awarded to her in punitive damages by a jury.

A judge later reduced the amount from $2.7 million to $640,000. However, the judge also issued a court order that McDonalds lower the temperature of their coffee to a safer range (below 175°F) or face penalties by way of fines.

But McDonalds did not lower the temperatures of their coffee. McDonalds has asserted that this is to keep their product fresher for longer, which generates more profit. In fact, this business decision indicates that McDonalds believes that it will be more profitable by serving dangerously hot coffee and suffering repeat lawsuits (and legal fees) than it would simply serving coffee at a safe temperature.

McDonalds revenue from coffee sales is $1.3 million PER DAY. This will not be the last time something like this happens. Edit: spelling

irontuskk on September 20th, 2023 at 03:48 UTC »

something about the original case nobody is mentioning is the fact that the coffee was kept so hot on purpose -- to prevent people dining in the restaurant from getting free refills. In the discovery phase they found internal documents discussing how long people sat around before leaving and how hot they'd need to make the coffee to prevent them from drinking enough to need a refill before leaving. Insane.

https://www.poolelg.com/blog/the-truth-behind-the-mcdonald-s-hot-coffee-case-.cfm

During the trial it was revealed that McDonald’s knew that heating their coffee to this temperature would be dangerous, but they did it anyways because it would save them money. When you serve coffee that is too hot to drink, it will take much longer for a person to drink their coffee, which means that McDonald’s will not have to give out as many free refills of coffee. This policy by the fast food chain is the reason the jury awarded $2.7 million dollars in punitive damages in the McDonald's hot coffee case.

producerd on September 20th, 2023 at 03:01 UTC »

Did I just hit the wrong button in my DeLorean?