What a lot of people get wrong about the 1994 McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit
This is a very light treatment of an important case. 
It didn&#x27;t go into the extensive surgery she had, and that her case wasn&#x27;t for $20K, it was just to pay for her medical expenses.<p>Also, though maybe not important in this article, was the logic behind the jury&#x27;s award. They placed the award at 2 days worth of McD&#x27;s nationwide coffee sales.<p>But I am glad that they did mention the other 700+ suits filed against McDs, but they should have gone into a little more depth about how McDs used its extensive legal department to squash those complaints. A practice that still continues today.<p>Edit: And for more interesting reads, check out the Stella Awards site. Now defunct, it was devoted to finding <i>really</i> stupid law suits, and debunking urban legend law suits. The quoted aim was to show that there is a real issue with US law suits, that doesn&#x27;t need fake &quot;I microwaved my poodle because the instructions didn&#x27;t let me know that was bad&quot; to let people know there is an issue.<p>I teach lawyers English, and one of my more fun classes is mixing up a bunch of true and fake lawsuits and watching them try to figure out which is which.<p>Pro-Tip: The more ridiculous sounding ones are actually real.<p>Case in point - a couple who lost their 2 year old in a lawnmower accident at day care found out that the day care only had a $100K insurance policy. So they dropped the case against the day care center and sued the manufacturer of the lawn mower.<p>There was a safety feature that was invented 16 years after the mower was built that the mower didn&#x27;t have. No recall statement or after action was specified by authorities. The jury awarded the couple a $2M award.