Jump To Navigation

Blog Post

The Truth Behind Tort Reform and Stella Liebeck

Posted by: Craig A. Knapp
February 17, 2012
Topic: Tort Reform

You may have heard the term "tort reform" before, but you may not have heard the true meaning of the word and what it entails. Following the infamous case of Stella Liebeck, the then 79-year-old woman who had McDonald-s hot coffee spilled on her due to an inefficient lid and coffee that was brewed at too high of a temperature, "tort reform" became a buzz word across the U.S.

What is tort?

Tort means harm. Thus, if someone commits a tort, they have harmed you in some way.

What is tort reform?

Tort reform is an effort to limit the rights of people to bring a case to court, or limit the likelihood of filing a lawsuit.

You may be wondering why Americans would want to limit their right to file a lawsuit and the answer stems from the coverage of the McDonald's Hot Coffee case in the early '90s. Following Liebeck's lawsuit, media, corporate America, and American citizens turned her case into a joke, deeming it a frivolous lawsuit and an effort for "jackpot justice." Most recently, director Susan Saladoff brought light to this case and the coverage that followed in the documentary, "Hot Coffee."

In the film, we learn that, unlike public belief and media portrayal, Stella Liebeck was parked and sitting in the passenger seat when her cup of coffee spilt. We also learn that prior to Liebeck, McDonald's had more than 700 previous complaints about burns from their hot beverages, and lastly, and quite possibly most shockingly, we are shown the pictures of the horrendous damage the hot coffee brought to Liebeck resulting in about $10,000 in medical bills.

While still considering her personal responsibility in the matter, the jury did find that Liebeck had contributory negligence, deeming 20% of the incident Liebeck's fault and leaving 80% of the incident at the fault of McDonald's. It is often thought that if the plaintiff is at fault, there should be no reward. However, in contributory negligence, both sides can be at fault and a verdict can still be awarded for the plaintiff minus the percent deemed to be the plaintiff's fault. Because of this, the jury awarded Liebeck $2.7 million in punitive damages, which is the amount McDonald's makes in coffee sales in two days, as well as $160,000 in compensatory damage. Punitive damages are rarely awarded, but when they are, their purpose is to change the behavior of the wrongdoer. Therefore, this amount was reached in an effort to encourage McDonald's to make changes to their coffee. From here, the judge in the case reduced the jury's $2.7 million award to Liebeck down to $480,000, but in the end, Liebeck and McDonald's ended up settling for a confidential amount.

When a person is harmed in some way by a person or company as a result of negligence or intention, the person harmed has a right to hold that wrong-doer accountable for their actions. This is handled by the civil court. Article III of the Constitution of the United States guarantees that every person accused of wrongdoing has the right to a fair trial before a competent judge and a jury of one's peers.

When comparing Liebeck's injury and the legal circumstances that surround the ability to file a case, Liebeck was completely justified in seeking legal help and justice, despite the fact that she was found to be partially responsible. The civil justice system exists to protect people, making tort reform completely counter-productive. Enacting laws favoring tort reform is not only limiting our fundamental rights, they are completely discrediting judges' and jury's competence to deem a case worthy of award.

Fortunately, Arizona does not currently have any laws in favor of tort reform. If you or someone you love has been harmed by a person or business, don't be afraid to take legal action. Despite the criticism Stella Liebeck received, she won her case against McDonald's. Her courage resulted in McDonald's making changes to their coffee cup and lid design, as well as a reduction in the required holding temperature of their coffee, helping to prevent others from being harmed. Thanks to Stella Liebeck, her win was our win, making our morning coffee routine safer not only at McDonald's, but at other places that serve coffee, as well, in an effort to avoid a similar lawsuit.

Information for this blog was based upon information provided in the documentary, "Hot Coffee," currently being shown on HBO and online at www.hbogo.com.


The Knapp & Roberts law firm represents serious injury and wrongful death clients throughout Arizona, including the communities of Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa, Glendale, Peoria, Surprise, Queen Creek, Apache Junction, Goodyear, Tucson, Flagstaff, and Yuma in the Valley of the Sun - Maricopa County, Pinal County, Coconino County, Yuma County, and Gila County.