Question 1:

A 79-year-old woman wasa passenger ina car at a McDonald's drive-thru. She received a cup of hot coffee in a Styrofoam cup, sealed by a lid, with an estimated temperature of 190 degrees F.

The car was stopped when she placed the coffee between her legs so she could remove the lid and add cream and sugar, she spilled the contents of the cup into her lap. She was wearing sweat pants that reportedly held the hot liquid against her skin for over 90 seconds.

She suffered severe, third-degree burns on her thighs, hips, and groin that required extensive hospital treatment, including skin grafts.

McDonald's had an operations policy that required coffee to be served at a temperature of 180-190 degrees or greater. In the ten years prior to this incident, McDonald's had received 700 complaints of coffee burns (of varying severity).

Did McDonalds act reasonably prudent?

1. Take a position
2. Give 2-3 arguments in support of your position.
3. Identify 1-2 counter-arguments.
4. Explain how you overcome the counter-argument(s).
5. Conclude

Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants