Research and review articles on the McDonald’s hot coffee case, Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants

Research and review articles on the McDonald’s® hot coffee case, Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants

Research and review articles on the McDonald’s® hot coffee case, Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants No. CV-93-02419, 1995 WL 360309 (Bernalillo County, N.M. Dist. Ct. Aug. 18, 1994).

Answer the following questions:
1. Do you think the jury’s punitive damage award was reasonable? Why, or why not?
2. Is this award consistent with the purpose of punitive damages? Why, or why not?
3. Assume that you are the judge in this case. What amount of punitive damages would you award to the plaintiff? Explain your answer.

You are expected to review and comment on at least two of your classmates’ responses.

……….Answer preview………….

I think the punitive damages awarded were reasonable because (1) the coffee served was extremely hot and it posed danger to Lieback. (2) The company knew the coffee produced was excessively hot but did not bother to provide warnings on the labels informing the consumers that they needed to be extra careful…………….

APA

164 words