Media Jumps to Judgment in Describing Starbucks Burn Lawsuit as Frivolous
Once again, the mainstream media is helping to perpetuate the myth of the frivolous lawsuit.
This time the culprit is Good Morning America Radio on XM Sattelite Radio.
Recently, the show's host reported about a lawsuit that a New Jersey man filed after suffering third-degree burns at Starbucks.
Here's the gist of the Starbucks burn lawsuit, as covered by a New Jersey newspaper:
A Wayne man filed suit Thursday against a local Starbucks, claiming his hand was scalded by overly hot tea from an improperly lidded cup.
Antonio Couso and his wife, Lucy, were at a Starbucks on Route 23 in Wayne on March 12, 2006, when the spill occurred, according to the civil suit filed in state Superior Court in Paterson.
Fort Lee lawyer Rosemary Arnold, representing the Cousos, said that "when he went to pick up the cup, the top wasn't on correctly. The top came off.
"When you as a consumer go into a Starbucks and order tea and the lid is on the cup, when you pick up the cup, you have a right to expect that the server has put the lid on properly," Arnold said.
The GMA Radio host jumped to the conclusion that so many in the media do, giving the impression that this lawsuit was frivolous and that the plaintiffs and their attorneys are greedy. Neither the host nor her callers considered that Couso might have been severely injured and that he suffered as a result of Starbucks' negligence.
Unfortunately, the insurance industry and corporations have conditioned Americans to believe that all personal injury and products liability lawsuits are frivolous, when in fact the contrary is likely true. Most attorneys won't pursue personal injury cases unless the plaintiff has a legitimate claim, in other words, a real injury that requires extensive medical treatment and that deserves compensation.
Of course, the McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit came up in the GMA Radio discussion. The case involving 79-year-old Stella Lieback, who was burned after ordering a cup of coffee at the McDonald's drive-thru, has been widely misreported and misrepresented. A jury awarded her $3 million in punitive and compensatory damages for her injuries.
Here are the facts, in brief, courtesy of Liebeck's attorney and the Center for Justice & Democracy:
- By corporate specifications, McDonald's sells its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit.
Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns in two to seven seconds - Third-degree burns do not heal without skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability of the victim for many months, and in some cases, years.
- McDonald's admitted that it has known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years -- the risk was brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits. in fact, from 1982 to 1992, McDonald's coffee burned more than 700 people.
- McDonald's admitted that it did not warn customers of the nature and extent of this risk of burns.
- Liebeck's treating physician testified that her injury was one of the worst scald burns he had ever seen.