Wednesday, February 11, 2009

We all have our causes.

I just received a funny note that mentioned the McDonald's coffee case. For some reason, I always feel it is my mission to inform people about the facts of this case. I don't know why, I just want you to know it was not a frivolous lawsuit. I just like facts, okay?

The full story is here. I think it's a good read. If you don't want to read the whole thing, below is the part that's most important.

During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard.

McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.

Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee.

Plaintiffs' expert, a scholar in thermodynamics applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebeck's spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn.

McDonalds asserted that customers buy coffee on their way to work or home, intending to consume it there. However, the companys own research showed that customers intend to consume the coffee immediately while driving.

And now you know - the rest of the story. I'm going back to work.


  1. Wow...their coffee is really that hot? That's fucking ridiculous. How could anyone think that is a reasonable temperature for something meant for human consumption? (And, just for the sake of argument, who buys coffee at McDonald's and says, "Hmm, that coffee is awfully appealing. I'm very thirsty, and some coffee would hit the spot. Eh...I think I'll wait until I get home to drink this miraculous substance, conveniently packaged in such a fashion as to be easy to drink in a moving vehicle, such as this automobile that I'm now pulling out of the drive-thru lane at McDonald's in. Fancy that..."

    Apparently, in my mind, random commuters who buy McDonald's coffee have vivid internal monologues. Or something like that...