Starbucks Sued Over Alleged Hot Tea Burns

May 4, 2010

Starbucks Corp. has been sued by a customer who allegedly suffered second-degree burns after being served tea that was too hot.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff Zeynep Inanli was served tea that was “unreasonably hot, in containers which were not safe,” at a Starbucks store at 685 Third Avenue in Manhattan.

As a result of Starbucks’ negligence, the plaintiff suffered “great physical pain and mental anguish,” including the burns, the complaint said.

The plaintiff seeks unspecified damages.

Starbucks, based in Seattle, did not immediately return requests for comment. The plaintiff’s lawyer did not immediately return a call for comment.

Retailers periodically face lawsuits for serving beverages at temperatures that customers say are too high.

In one well-known case, a jury in 1994 ordered McDonald’s Corp to pay $2.86 million to Stella Liebeck, an Albuquerque, New Mexico woman who claimed she scalded herself with the restaurant’s coffee. The parties later settled.

The case is Inanli v. Starbucks Corp et al, New York State Supreme Court, New York County, No. 105767-2010.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel; Editing by Bernard Orr)

Topics Lawsuits

Was this article valuable?

Here are more articles you may enjoy.

Latest Comments

  • May 12, 2010 at 6:13 am
    wudchuck says:
    DITTO! we as a society do not want to take personal responsibility. we are looking to sue and get lots of money and the lawyers create more of a havoc over it because in mos... read more
  • May 12, 2010 at 7:38 am
    Tom says:
    Wchuck, you are on the right track; however attorneys get 33-50% of the take because they hold the keys to the treasure chest aka, access to the court system's good ole boy ne... read more
  • May 11, 2010 at 2:52 am
    DW says:
    It appears that she is alleging that the lid was not properly secured and as she walked away it spilled on her arm and she sustained 2nd degree burns. I get that it would hur... read more

Add a CommentSee All Comments (62)Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features