Final answer:
The Liebeck vs. McDonald's Restaurants case involved a woman who was severely burned by hot coffee at a McDonald's drive-thru. The court ruled in favor of the woman, highlighting McDonald's excessive coffee temperature. Whether the decision was correct is subjective.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Liebeck vs. McDonald's Restaurants case is a famous product liability lawsuit involving a woman named Stella Liebeck who suffered severe burns from hot coffee she spilled while at a McDonald's drive-thru.
The legal reasoning behind the court's decision was that McDonald's had been serving their coffee at an excessively high temperature, which posed a danger to their customers. The court ruled in favor of Liebeck and awarded her compensatory and punitive damages.
Whether or not the court's decision was correct is subjective and can be debated. Some argue that McDonald's should have been held responsible for serving dangerously hot coffee.
While others believe that Liebeck should have been more cautious or that the damages awarded to her were excessive. Overall, the case raised awareness about product liability and prompted changes in the way restaurants serve hot beverages.