Facts about the McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit - CAOC

One such effect was the media portrayal of Stella Liebeck, whose case is the backdrop for the highly-acclaimed HBO documentary "Hot Coffee." The documentary tells the tale of Mrs. Liebeck's often misunderstood McDonald's "hot coffee" case which took place almost 15 years ago. Mrs. Liebeck, a 79-year-old New Mexico woman, sued McDonald's after spilling scalding hot coffee in her lap while sitting in the passenger seat of a parked car. Contrary to media reports at the time, her injuries were far from trivial. Mrs. Liebeck suffered third-degree burns on six percent of her skin with lesser burns covering over 16 percent of her body. She had to endure multiple operations to treat her burns, including skin grafts. The media neglected to report that prior to the Liebeck case, McDonald's had received over 700 complaints from consumers burned by coffee served at 180 degrees fahrenheit (serving coffee at 180 degrees was McDonald's company policy). McDonald's willfully ignored the harm they had caused hundreds of people.

Did he just say that? Did a conservative just criticize opponents of tort reform for bringing up the Liebeck case?

The Liebeck case is just one of four examples shown in the film to demonstrate that corporations and those in the pocket of those corporations are stripping away the power of juries in civil litigation. Tort lawsuits are part of the fabric of our justice system for a reason -- to hold individuals and corporations accountable when they do harm. "Hot Coffee," if nothing else, is a great catalyst to start an important dialogue about how far corporate interests have advanced in the courtroom at the expense of everyday people seeking accountability.

The "Real" Stella - the True Stella Awards

The overview given of the Liebeck case is quite biased, I think, and .. The only link between Connor's comments and the Liebeck case, is Stossel's own weazel-word statement that " these lawsuits send the wrong message," "These lawsuits" could be considered a general statement, but, when used in this context, they become specifically directed at the Liebeck case.

A Misunderstood Products Liability Case - Liebeck v. McDonalds

Sadly, we all have to take what the press tells us with a less than trusting attitude. That’s the moral of the Stella Liebeck case. Most of the public things of the Stella Liebeck case as the prototypical example of how our legal system is broken…except that it isn’t; instead it’s really one of the biggest examples of how the media is broken.

The products liability case is still scoffed at