Miyah Mays
Tort Case Liebeck v. McDonald’s
Issue:
Did McDonald fail in its responsibility to protect the safety of the customer by providing extremely hot
coffees?
Rule:
Legal responsibility of any manufacturing company, the product shall be beneficial to the customers, not
at the cost of Safety of the users or customers that shall be the primary business interest of the product-
based company as a Product liability. Product liability is the legal responsibility of the company for their
products. If there are any quality issues, product liability is addressed in the warranty claim, and safety
issues needs to be educated to the customers through warning symbols, message, and instructions as a
legal procedure. Product specifications related to the temperature of the coffee shall be within the
specific limits that shall not create or make any deep tissue burning issues to the customers.
Analysis:
The plaintiff had purchased the hot coffee from the company. She suffered from 3rd degree burns due
to the extremely hot coffee in her groin area and on her legs. She was hospitalized for 8 days and had to
have skin grafts. To get complete cure of the burns she had to undergo medical treatments with a
yearlong regular follow up visit. Because of this she lost her job and expenses incurred for treating the
burns from the dropped hot coffee on her legs. So, she claimed the excess medical expenses from the
company. The company denied the claim as it was not their fault at all. The company had not informed
her about the safety hazards of their product in anyway shape or form. The company that owned the
product and sold to the customer without warning about the safety issues due to the higher
temperature of their product did not tell the customer.