Starbucks Ordered to Pay $50 Million to Delivery Driver Scalded by Hot Tea
A California jury has delivered a stinging verdict against Starbucks, ordering the coffee giant to pay a staggering $50 million to Michael Garcia, a Postmates delivery driver who suffered severe third-degree burns to his genitals after a hot tea spilled on him in 2020. The incident, which occurred at a Los Angeles Starbucks drive-thru, has resulted in life-altering injuries and ongoing trauma for the now 30-year-old Garcia.
The lawsuit detailed the horrific experience Garcia endured on February 8, 2020, when he went to pick up three "medicine ball" hot teas. According to court documents, the barista failed to properly secure one of the hot drinks in its carrier. Within a mere 1.4 seconds of Garcia receiving the drink tray, the cup dislodged, spilling scalding tea into his lap.
The immediate aftermath was one of excruciating pain. Garcia, then 25 years old, screamed in agony as the hot liquid seared his skin. The sudden shock caused his vehicle to lurch forward. He was rushed to the emergency room, where doctors diagnosed third-degree burns to his penis, groin, and inner thighs.
Garcia’s injuries necessitated extensive medical treatment, including hospitalization, multiple skin grafts, and a lengthy recovery process. He was transferred to a burn center where doctors performed two skin grafts on his penis. To attempt to restore sensation, a procedure was performed to remove nerves from the area. Doctors even resorted to using pig skin as part of the reconstructive efforts.
Beyond the physical trauma, Garcia now suffers from severe post-traumatic stress disorder. His lawyers explained that any friction around his genitals causes pain, a constant reminder of the agonizing incident.
The legal battle between Garcia and Starbucks has been protracted and contentious. According to Garcia’s legal team, Starbucks initially offered a $3 million settlement before the trial. Later, they reportedly increased the offer to $30 million, contingent upon Garcia agreeing to certain conditions. Garcia’s legal team stated that he was willing to accept the $30 million if Starbucks issued a formal apology, changed its store policies regarding hot drink safety, and circulated a memo to all locations emphasizing the importance of securing drinks before handing them to customers. However, Starbucks refused to meet these demands.
This led to the case proceeding to trial, culminating in the jury’s decision to award Garcia $50 million in damages. With the addition of interest, attorney fees, and costs, the final amount Starbucks will be obligated to pay is expected to exceed $60 million.
Michael Parker, one of Garcia’s attorneys, expressed his satisfaction with the jury’s verdict on social media, emphasizing the years of effort that went into achieving the outcome. He also highlighted Starbucks’ initial reluctance to release video footage of the incident, stating that the firm had to obtain a court order and that Starbucks was sanctioned for failing to comply. Upon viewing the video, the jury unanimously found Starbucks liable for Garcia’s injuries.
Nicholas Rowley, another lawyer representing Garcia, stated that Starbucks had been repeatedly warned about the dangers of improperly secured drinks but chose to ignore safety protocols. He further asserted that the incident has irrevocably altered Garcia’s life.
In response to the verdict, a Starbucks spokesperson issued a statement expressing sympathy for Garcia’s situation but disagreeing with the jury’s finding of fault and deeming the damages excessive. “We disagree with the jurys decision that we were at fault for this incident and believe the damages awarded to be excessive,” said spokesperson Jaci Anderson. “We plan to appeal. We have always been committed to the highest safety standards in our stores, including the handling of hot drinks.”
The case underscores the potential consequences of negligence in handling hot beverages and highlights the importance of safety protocols in the food and beverage industry. The significant damages awarded by the jury reflect the severity of Garcia’s injuries, the ongoing pain and suffering he endures, and the life-altering impact of the incident. The outcome of Starbucks’ planned appeal remains to be seen, but the case has already served as a stark reminder of the responsibility companies have to ensure the safety of their customers and the potential financial repercussions of failing to do so. It also highlights the David and Goliath nature of many legal battles, where individuals face off against large corporations with vast resources. In this instance, the jury sided with the individual, sending a powerful message about corporate responsibility and the value of human suffering. The case also brings into question the pre-trial settlement process, where corporations often attempt to minimize payouts, potentially undervaluing the true extent of the damages suffered by the injured party.
