McDonald's: The coffee spill
1. What are the major issues in the Liebeck case and in the following incidents? Was the lawsuit “frivolous” as some people thought, or serious business?
The major issues in this case include how hot the coffee should be, when to draw the line on making a case outrageous and how corporations are supposed to please customers without worrying about being sued. I believe that the lawsuit was frivolous because of the amount of money that was being asked for. It is common sense that when you order coffee or any other hot beverage that contents will be hot. I feel that it was the fault of Liebeck and although this is the case, McDonald’s should have paid the medical bills and settled out of court before it was blown out of proportion.
2. What are McDonald’s social (economic, legal, and ethical) responsibilities toward consumers in the Liebeck case and the other cases? What are consumers' responsibilities when they buy a product such as hot coffee or hot hamburgers? How does a company give consumers what they want and yet protect them at the same time?
McDonald’s responsibilities are to be honest and fair economically, legally and ethically. Any business should keep the safety of their customers in mind and if an incident does occur, take responsibility. Consumers are responsible for situational awareness. They should pay more attention to what they are doing and if something does occur, consumers should act within reason and not try to get every cent from the company they can. It is impossible to keep everyone happy.
3.What are the arguments supporting McDonald’s position in the Liebeck case? What are the arguments supporting Liebeck’s position?
McDonald’s stated that Liebeck had only herself to blame for placing the cup between her legs. It was also stated that Liebeck failed to leap out of the seat allowing the coffee to penetrate her clothing and burning her. A burn expert for Liebeck stated that 170 degree coffee is capable of causing second degree burns
The major issues in this case include how hot the coffee should be, when to draw the line on making a case outrageous and how corporations are supposed to please customers without worrying about being sued. I believe that the lawsuit was frivolous because of the amount of money that was being asked for. It is common sense that when you order coffee or any other hot beverage that contents will be hot. I feel that it was the fault of Liebeck and although this is the case, McDonald’s should have paid the medical bills and settled out of court before it was blown out of proportion.
2. What are McDonald’s social (economic, legal, and ethical) responsibilities toward consumers in the Liebeck case and the other cases? What are consumers' responsibilities when they buy a product such as hot coffee or hot hamburgers? How does a company give consumers what they want and yet protect them at the same time?
McDonald’s responsibilities are to be honest and fair economically, legally and ethically. Any business should keep the safety of their customers in mind and if an incident does occur, take responsibility. Consumers are responsible for situational awareness. They should pay more attention to what they are doing and if something does occur, consumers should act within reason and not try to get every cent from the company they can. It is impossible to keep everyone happy.
3.What are the arguments supporting McDonald’s position in the Liebeck case? What are the arguments supporting Liebeck’s position?
McDonald’s stated that Liebeck had only herself to blame for placing the cup between her legs. It was also stated that Liebeck failed to leap out of the seat allowing the coffee to penetrate her clothing and burning her. A burn expert for Liebeck stated that 170 degree coffee is capable of causing second degree burns