McDonald’s Hot Coffee Lawsuit Includes AWOL Sex Charges (Really)

April 12th, 2012. By AbiK

Rare is it, indeed, that you can write such a headline. But yes, there are two new McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuits—which is somehow fitting as we’re now celebrating the 20th anniversary of THE McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit—the one that gave birth to the whole hot coffee lawsuit genre. This time, while one lawsuit involves a distracted grandmother and her 4-year-old granddaughter, the other does, in fact, include an element of sex.

Let’s talk sex first. So how does one file a hot coffee lawsuit and somehow throw sex—specifically a lack of—into it? (I should use ‘loss of consortium’ here but really, who calls it ‘consortium’?)

Well, it appears that Melissa Pettigrew had ordered coffee at a McDonald’s drive-thru back in August, 2010. And the coffee spilled onto her lap—her thighs and abdomen to be specific—leading to a burn injury. According to a quote from her attorney, Ms. Pettigrew is still receiving treatment for her burns.

If you’ve ever had exceedingly hot coffee that you’ve ordered on-the-go, you know it can be pretty painful if it spills on you. You also know, however, that there are 50-50 odds at best that the person serving you the coffee has actually put the lid on properly. So it’s easy to see how Ms. Pettigrew might have wound up filing a personal injury complaint.

It’s her co-plaintiff that gives this hot coffee lawsuit it’s twist—yes, Ms. Pettigrew is not suing solo. Ms. Pettigrew’s husband is alleging that he’s suffered loss of consortium as a result of his wife’s hot coffee burn injuries. You know Mickey D’s in-house counsel said, “now we’ve seen everything” when this lawsuit landed on their desks.

Sadly, though, you can understand this one. We know—hot coffee lawsuit jokes aside—that the 1992 McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit was not actually frivolous—there was not only injury but what most would consider negligence on McDonald’s part (note, the ’92 lawsuit went to trial and ultimately settled). And, if the allegations in the Pettigrews’ lawsuit are true—i.e., that that McDonald’s employees served coffee that was too hot or without securing the lid, or that McDonald’s did not properly train and educate workers on handing hot coffee to customers—then shame on McDonald’s for not effectively institutionalizing processes and procedures to avoid such hot coffee injuries.

The second McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit has two sides to it—it’s not as seemingly straightforward as the one above.

In this one, Mona Abdelal was with her granddaughters, Lynn Abdelal (4 yrs. old) and her 2-year-old sister, at a McDonald’s in Harwood Heights, IL. The grandmother had finished her coffee and instructed little Lynn to throw the cup out. Lynn, not understanding, went up to the McDonald’s counter and ordered a refill for her grandmother. The little girl was told that fresh coffee was brewing, so the girl came back and was given a cup of coffee—allegedly with an unsecured lid and no protective cardboard holder.

According to the complaint, Lynn “could not hold the cup steady in her small hands. A lot of coffee spilled out of the cup onto (the girl’s) chest, causing (her) to sustain severe second-degree burns”.

There is absolutely no question that it is a travesty when a little child—any child—is harmed; and in this instance, the girl’s doctors have said she will have permanent scarring from the coffee burns.

There is also absolutely no question, that if the allegations are true—that a McDonald’s worker gave a 4-year-old hot coffee (beyond irresponsible) that was improperly contained (negligence)—that McDonald’s should at least in part be liable.

However, think of the time elapsed here—a little girl who is supposed to go to a trash bin and come right back instead goes to the restaurant counter, engages in at least some dialog, has to come back for the coffee, and then gingerly walk back to the table to Grandma. Where on earth was the grandmother’s attention all that time? According to reports, it was on the 2-year-old sister. Understandably, but a lack of attention on the 4-year-old as she’s wandering through McDonald’s seems a bit, well irresponsible.

So while this hot coffee lawsuit is seeking close to $4 million in damages, there are some grey areas and we’ll have to see where it all nets out.

Tags: Burn Injury, Hot Coffee Lawsuit, Loss of Consortium, McDonald's, McDonald's Coffee

This was posted on Thursday, April 12th, 2012 at 8:05 am and is filed under lawsuits, Personal Injury . Feel free to respond, or trackback. Read our comments policy.