- $50 million verdict against Starbucks for severe burns from spilled tea
- Incident occurred in 2020 after employee failed to secure hot drink
- Garcia required skin grafts and suffered permanent disfigurement
- Starbucks disputes liability, plans appeal citing excessive damages
- Case mirrors historic McDonald's hot beverage litigation trends
A Los Angeles jury delivered a landmark $50 million verdict in favor of Michael Garcia, a delivery driver who sustained catastrophic burns from a spilled Starbucks tea. The 2020 drive-through incident left Garcia with life-altering injuries requiring multiple surgical procedures, including skin grafts to his genital area. Attorneys demonstrated that an employee's failure to properly secure the venti-sized hot tea in a takeout tray directly caused the accident.
Starbucks expressed sympathy for Garcia but maintains its commitment to safety standards, calling the damages excessive. This case revives scrutiny of restaurant chain liability, drawing parallels to the infamous 1994 Liebeck v. McDonald's case where a woman won $2.86 million for third-degree burns - later reduced to under $600,000. Industry analysts note such lawsuits often prompt operational changes, including revised beverage temperature protocols and staff training improvements.
The food service industry faces mounting pressure to implement burn prevention measures. Recent National Coffee Association data shows 78% of major chains now use double-walled cups, while 63% mandate maximum serving temperatures of 175°F. A 2023 Texas case saw Taco Bell settle for $1.2 million after a customer suffered second-degree burns from nacho cheese. These incidents highlight the complex balance between product quality and consumer protection.
Legal experts suggest Garcia's award reflects juries' increasing intolerance for preventable injuries. This verdict signals that corporations must prioritize safety over speed,said consumer rights attorney Lisa Monroe. Insurance industry reports indicate a 22% rise in foodservice liability premiums since 2020, with burn claims accounting for 41% of major payouts. As Starbucks prepares its appeal, the case underscores the financial and reputational risks of hot beverage service lapses.
