What Many Don't Know About The McDonalds Hot Coffee Lady

[tednlou2]

This story has been mocked and used as an example of why we need tort reform.  In this very short documentary-style video, from the New York Times, you learn the real story.  You also learn how the media was complicit in the "money-hungry lady" narrative. 

McDonald's coffee was kept so hot, that it would cause 3rd degree burns in seconds.  And, you see very graphic photos of her injuries.  She did not get the $2.9 million figure, that many believe to this day she got.  She got less than $500,000 and McDonald's only lowered their coffee temp by ten degrees. 

So, many may still say it is ridiculous.  The main point is how the media fueled the narrative.  They are notorious for only giving sound bytes.

http://www.upworthy.com/ever-hear-about-the-lady-that-spilled-coffee-on-herself-at-mcdonalds-then-sued-for-millions

[bocker3]

This story has been mocked and used as an example of why we need tort reform.  In this very short documentary-style video, from the New York Times, you learn the real story.  You also learn how the media was complicit in the "money-hungry lady" narrative. 

McDonald's coffee was kept so hot, that it would cause 3rd degree burns in seconds.  And, you see very graphic photos of her injuries.  She did not get the $2.9 million figure, that many believe to this day she got.  She got less than $500,000 and McDonald's only lowered their coffee temp by ten degrees. 

So, many may still say it is ridiculous.  The main point is how the media fueled the narrative.  They are notorious for only giving sound bytes.

http://www.upworthy.com/ever-hear-about-the-lady-that-spilled-coffee-on-herself-at-mcdonalds-then-sued-for-millions

So -- the media fueled the story, can't be trusted, only give sound bytes (all of which I agree with), HOWEVER, you take as gospel this "documentary" from the New York Times, which I'm sure had some sound bytes back in the day.  Basically, you are using the media to make your point that media can't be trusted??  I mean this documentary kind of showed a "picture byte" -- those, very brief, graphic pics were not of her injuries -- they were of the grafts used to help heal her injuries.  So -- not really the whole story there either.  Not that I am trying to minimize her injuries -- scalds are horrific burns, because you can't "put it out", you have to wait for the liquid to cool.

I do feel badly that this lady couldn't live this down -- personally, I think the story shows the problems with lawyers and juries more than any problem with her.  Clearly, the judge felt that the jury went beyond reason as he lowered the award from $2.9 million to $650,000 an almost 80% reduction (if my head math is right)  Of course, that assumes one believes this documentary, because after saying how much the judge reduced it to, it says she settled for ~$500,000.  why would you settle a case that you won in court??  Again part of the story seems missing.

Bottomline -- coffee is supposed to be hot -- hot liquid scalds human flesh.  Every accident is not a lawsuit.

Mike

[tednlou2]

The dollar figures stuck out to me, at first.  But, I assumed when they said it was settled for less than $500,000, instead of what the judge reduced it to, meant McDonald's was threatening to keep appealing unless she accepted less.  I mean, the judge could have lowered it to $100,000 and she could have been waiting for that money for 10 years. 

Your criticism is fair.  They should have been more clear on that, especially when the biggest criticism was how the media didn't tell the whole story.  And, it would have been good for them to show how they (NYT) reported the story back then.  The main point is how the media, including Seinfeld and other shows, turned this woman into someone just trying to get rich.  And, I think most think she got the $2.9 million.  I did.  It does make me wonder how many other things we think happened one way, when there are more details and nuance.  Most of us are not going to deeply research small stories like this; we just take the media's word.  Even with the more consequential stories, many just take their word.