Liebeck v McDonalds by Chris Mangopoulos

2024-04-25 13:44:31 UTC

Im neutral. I think Liebeck was right to sue mcdonalds, and mcdonalds shouldnt make their coffee so hot. But Liebeck spilled it herself. she bought it, which makes it hers when it comes out the building.

2024-04-25 13:44:56 UTC

I think both sides did something wrong. First, the woman should've felt how hot the coffee was in her hand. Second, Mc Donald's should've just paid the hospital bills instead of getting sued. There were multiple people getting burnt by their coffee, meaning it was way too hot in the first place but the people should also be smart enough to be careful with the hot coffee they chose to get.

2024-04-25 13:45:56 UTC

I think mcdonalds is in the right, the woman spilled coffee herself and she blamed it on mcdonalds. Mcdonalds most likely had good reasons for the hot temperature of coffee, after all it IS coffee.

2024-04-25 13:46:20 UTC

Trinity Barnes - I believe McDonald’s was wrong, if the degree is higher than what’s typical coffee is, imagine drinking it right away? And then there was no warning label so you don’t know how hot it is, sure you can feel it but you wouldn’t see a 3rd degree burn, so I think the lady is in the right

2024-04-25 13:46:32 UTC

Neutral. I understand where Liebeck came from, the coffee was too hot. Yes, I think she had the legal right to sue, but morally I can't get behind it. McDonalds shouldn't have made their coffee so hot.

2024-04-25 13:47:24 UTC

My opinion on the famous McDonalds hot coffee lawsuit was hart against the old woman ,McDonalds was in the wrong for there coffee being So hot .I agree with liebeck. they didnt even give much of a warning .

2024-04-25 13:50:38 UTC

I agree with both side. She could been safer but the coffee did not need to that hot.

vaughnannabell440 — 2024-04-25 13:51:46 UTC

i agree with both because some people dont care but some people do care and it just depends on the person

2024-04-25 13:52:10 UTC

I think both sides could have prevented this from taking off like this. McDonald's made the coffee hotter than a normal coffee machine. There was not any warnings. Ms. Liebeck could've potentially been more careful. This lawsuit eventually caused nationwide debate.

2024-04-25 13:53:08 UTC

I think it was Liebecks fault because you could of cleaned off a spot. I also think McDonalds should have better secured cups and gived her money for the pain, suffering and hospital bill.

2024-04-25 13:54:43 UTC

i think its both sided i mean , for one she should know when she ordered it that it would be hot , i mean its coffee , but also there should be a warning sticker like on the cup or window or menu stating that it will be hot . I think the lady it mostly in the right i mean mostly anybody would sue for a burn that bad .

2024-04-25 13:56:00 UTC

i honestly get both sides because McDonald's should have put a warning sign on the cup although if it was that hot im pretty sure she felt it through the cup and at the same time SHE WAS THE ONE who bought it and walk out of mcdonalds with that hot cup in her hand AND THEN PUT IT IN HER LAP.

2024-04-25 14:25:36 UTC

I feel they both are to blame she should not open that cup and it may also have been to hot too.

David Martin

2024-04-25 14:25:57 UTC

I think that both of them are equally in the wrong because Mcdonalds had there coffe very hot but at the same time the lady could have held the coffe with her hands or something like that.

2024-04-25 14:26:56 UTC

i am with the old lady

2024-04-25 14:28:19 UTC

I'm neutral on the case, liebeck had the right to sue but not for 2.6M. Also mcdonald's doesn't need to have their coffee that hot.

2024-04-25 14:28:44 UTC

I would need to look more into the facts. Like why she was taking the lid off to begin with. At a liability stand point, I don't find McDonalds responsible with the information I have. She already payed for the coffee, and drove out of the parking lot. So through that action, it shows you agreed to the purchase and what you got. What happened after with it, is on you, even if it is something you didn't intend, McDonalds didnt intend it either.

2024-04-25 14:29:03 UTC

I think both are in the wrong. McDonald's should not have made their coffee way too hot. But she should have been more careful with her coffee.

2024-04-25 14:29:46 UTC

I believe that Liebeck was in the right for suing Mcdonalds. She was elderly and probably wouldn't purposefully experience that level of physical pain. It took a bit too long for Mcdonalds to act upon the incident. In one way or another, justice was served.

2024-04-25 14:29:49 UTC

i agree with her to sue mcdonalds since the cause of that happening since mcdonalds is liable their worker their company their responsibility . they are liable

2024-04-25 14:31:01 UTC

I agree with both sides. The coffee was hot enough to cause third degree burns, but I think Lieback was more responsible than stated and could have opened the lid outside of her lap.

2024-04-25 14:31:38 UTC

I think McDonalds was in the right. Common sense says do not open a cup of hot liquid in a moving vehicle. Coffee is intended to be hot, if you want cold coffee then order a cold (or iced) coffee.

2024-04-25 14:33:18 UTC

I believe both sides did something wrong. Because the coffee shouldn't have been too hot to become a burning point, but she should have also been more cautious knowing how hot it is.

saraiwalker542 — 2024-04-25 16:53:48 UTC

im the old lady side tbh

2024-04-25 17:14:54 UTC

I'm on her side, yes it is her fault that she spilled the coffee but why was it THAT hot?? That's their fault she got hurt that bad since it was sooo hot.

2024-04-25 17:15:07 UTC

they're both wrong, mcdonalds for not following guidelines and the lady for not being careful

2024-04-25 17:15:33 UTC

I think its more McDonalds fault as the coffee was hotter than normal coffee maker temperatures. But its also somewhat Liebeck's fault because she spilled it on herself, but still that coffee has no reason to be that hot, if she had got some small burns I personally wouldn't think its a big deal. But no she got not 1, not 2, but 3rd degree burns. She got her 2.7mil so W for her.

2024-04-25 17:15:50 UTC

I agree with the final verdict. While I do think that Liebeck was damaged and scarred, the original totals were inflated. I do think that McDonalds did owe her money for the damages, and should decrease the temperature. Liebeck was not totally innocent, but she is justified on the basis of the coffee's abnormally high temperature.

2024-04-25 17:18:25 UTC

honestly they are both at fault a little bit because on one hand why is she getting a hot bev with no cup holder but at the same time mc donalds shouldve had labels saying hot and all that and or gave out better cups to reduce the risk of spills

2024-04-25 17:18:59 UTC

She bought the coffee knowing Mcdonald's has to serve it hot. Cant really blame it on McDonald's when you buy something hot you should watch it and be careful. But maybe they could have sold it not so hot to.

2024-04-25 17:19:35 UTC

I think both are at fault. She should've found a secure way to position the cup. It's common sense that coffee is hot. But it's also McDonald's fault for making it 30degrees hotter than at home coffee machines. She definitely didn't deserve the bullying, not like it was a small company. Its McDonald's.

2024-04-25 17:20:01 UTC

I am neutral. I think McDonald's could've lowered the coffee temperature for safety reasons, but the woman knew how hot McDonald's coffee was so she should've known to be more careful.

2024-04-25 17:20:15 UTC

I think they both are in the wrong, cause the coffee should not be that hot, and then the old lady did it to herself by spilling the coffee'

2024-04-25 17:20:19 UTC

Mia Skinner-Berden : I believe McDonalds was in the wrong because they could've added a warning label, given cupholders or check the temperature. The old woman had received terrible 3rd degree burns from the hot coffee and should be compensated for her medical bill.

2024-04-25 17:22:20 UTC

I'm on both sides, McDonalds shouldn't have their coffee that hot, but Ms. Liebeck should have thought better on opening something hot in a moving car, she should have taken care of everything in McDonalds or in the parking lot before they were moving. I do also thing even though she shouldn't have opened the coffee in a moving car Mcdonalds should also hold some responsibility with there being no warning labels and that McDonalds did in fact need to compensate something.

2024-04-25 17:24:51 UTC

I feel there is fault in both Liebeck and Mcdonalds. If that coffee was hot enough to leave 3rd degree burns on her body that would need medical attention there could have been others injured if the issue wasn't addressed, yes of course its hot cause it is coffee but it wouldn't be expected that the coffee is hot enough to leave a 3rd degree burn on someone. also on the other had if she was holding that coffee and knew it was hot she should have been more careful, especially if she had nowhere to place it.

2024-04-25 22:39:47 UTC

I agree with Ms. Liebeck because Mcmeh should lower the coffee temperature. It was proven that a normal house coffee machine is less temperature than Mcmeh's.