Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants Essays

Liebeck v. McDonald’s Parties Involved Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants The Incident Stella Liebeck was a 79 year old woman in New Mexico’s Albuquerque. She purchased a cup of coffee at a McDonald’s drive-in restaurant. She placed the coffee between her legs as she sat on the passenger seat. This occurred in 1992. Upon opening it, the coffee spilled over her lower body where she suffered third-degree burns on parts of her body. It is important to recognize the fact that it is the grandson who was

Stella Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants McDonald's has been involved in a number of lawsuits and other legal cases in the course of the fast food chain's 70-year history. Although one of the most known ones is the “Hot Coffee Lawsuit”. The individuals involved with the case include 79-year-old Stella Liebeck, and McDonald’s. Stella Liebeck of Albuquerque, New Mexico, was in the passenger seat of her grandson's car when she was severely burned by McDonalds' coffee in February 1992. The trial took

process of a guilty or non-guilty verdict is based on individual narratives, as opposed to a Bayesian form of decision making, or probabilities and likelihoods (O'Brien, 1). Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old department store clerk, in March of 1993 filed a lawsuit, commonly known as the “McDonalds Coffee Case,” against McDonald's Corporation. The Plaintiff argued that the coffee she purchased on February 2, 1992 was unreasonably dangerous and the defendant should be liable for the physical and mental harm

Liebeck v. McDonald's Introduction The Liebeck v. McDonald’s case is a very popular case that occurred in 1992. This case was not only popular but grossly misinformed as most of the events of this case were factually incorrect when reported to the public. People say she had ordered the coffee and spilt it on herself while driving out of the McDonald’s Drive Thru. This is false. In reality, Stella Liebeck, an elderly lady of 79 was in the passenger seat while her grandson was driving. As she got her

same ideology as others, which in the long run may prevent individuals from voicing their concerns. In addition, I also believe that what might be said to be a frivolous lawsuit now, may not be frivolous in the end, as was the case in Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants,