Liebeck Vs Mcdonald's

Citizens of the United States of America enjoy a lifestyle of freedom unlike that of any other country in the world. Companies and businesses are expected to comply with the standards of the average consumer; with that being said, American citizens are much more likely to file a law suit than consumers of a different nationality. In the year 1994 alone, thousands of law suits were filed (FindLaw). The most notable case, with exception to the Denny’s payout, was Stella Liebeck versus the popular fast food chain McDonald’s. Stella sustained third-degree burns when she accidentally spilled a McDonald’s cup of coffee onto her lap. She spent eight days in the hospital, receiving skin grafts for burns on her pelvic region. Stella was awarded $2.86

How was McDonald’s supposed to know that Stella would spill the coffee on herself? Coffee is meant to be served hot, just as blades are meant to be sharp. Stella suing for being burned by coffee is the same principal as a person suing a knife company after being cut by one of their products. The world is a dangerous place; many things around us have the capability to cause damage. Corporations should not be held responsible for any damage sustained after using their product improperly. McDonald’s could not have prevented Stella spilling the coffee on herself.
.
In the case of Liebeck versus McDonald’s, I definitely would have sided with McDonald’s. Despite the court’s decision, I disagree with the decision to reward Stella Liebeck financially. I stand by my decision for the reasons that coffee is meant to be served hot, Liebeck was extremely thin-skinned, and a company should not be held responsible for the misuse of their product even if it was unintentional. Our society is one that has almost become dependent on law suits, cases like Liebeck’s should not have been entertained in court. In my opinion, the judicial system failed