Starbucks Ordered to Pay $50M to Man After Coffee Burn Causes Permanent Penile Injury
A Los Angeles County jury has ordered Starbucks to pay $50 million to a Postmates driver who suffered life-altering injuries after spilling scalding hot tea on his lap. The verdict, delivered on Friday, follows a high-stakes trial that exposed significant lapses in how Starbucks handles hot drinks.
The incident dates back to 2020 when Michael Garcia picked up an order of three venti-sized “medicine balls” — a secret menu drink made from steamed lemonade and two types of tea — from a drive-thru Starbucks in South Los Angeles. According to Garcia, one of the drinks was negligently placed in the cardboard drink carrier without being properly secured. Less than two seconds after he received the order and began driving, the unsecured drink tipped over and spilled directly onto his lap, causing catastrophic burns.
Garcia was rushed to the emergency room by paramedics, where doctors confirmed he had suffered third-degree burns to his genitals. He was later treated at the renowned Grossman Burn Center, where he underwent two skin grafts on his penis in an effort to repair the damage. Despite the treatments, Garcia’s injuries left permanent consequences. His attorney, Nick Rowley, co-founder of Trial Lawyers for Justice, detailed the extent of the damage: Garcia’s penis is now permanently discolored and disfigured, with reduced length and girth. Worse yet, Garcia can no longer have a complete or sustained erection, and any friction during sex or masturbation causes intense pain.
“One of the most pleasurable experiences in life has been changed to pain,” Rowley said. “It’s an awful, awful injury. He’s a different person. This will affect every facet of his life.”
Starbucks, however, pushed back hard against the verdict. A company spokesperson called the award “excessive” and confirmed that Starbucks intends to appeal.
“We sympathize with Mr. Garcia, but we disagree with the jury’s decision that we were at fault for this incident and believe the damages awarded to be excessive,” said Jaci Anderson, Starbucks’ Director of Corporate Communications, in an email. “We plan to appeal. We have always been committed to the highest safety standards in our stores, including the handling of hot drinks.”
Rowley, never one to mince words, fired back at Starbucks’ response.
“They’re a bunch of idiots. They don’t have a chance in hell at getting this verdict reduced,” he said.
According to Rowley, a critical turning point in the case was surveillance footage from inside the Starbucks, which captured the moment the drinks were prepared. The video reportedly showed the barista securing two of the cups in the drink carrier but leaving the third one unsecured — the same cup that spilled and injured Garcia.
“The video showed that Michael did nothing wrong,” Rowley said. “It showed on video the drink wasn’t properly secured.”
The trial was split into two phases: liability and damages. After a weeklong liability trial, the jury deliberated for just 40 minutes before concluding that Starbucks was liable for the accident. In the damages phase, the jury deliberated for a little over two hours before handing down the $50 million verdict. Factoring in interest and attorney fees, the total payout could climb to $60 million. Rowley initially asked the jury for $120 million, and three of the jurors reportedly supported awarding that amount.
Starbucks had opportunities to settle the case before trial — and even after being found liable. Before the trial began, Starbucks offered Garcia $3 million to settle. After the liability verdict, the company increased its offer to $30 million but insisted the settlement terms remain confidential. Garcia refused both offers.
The case immediately drew comparisons to the infamous 1992 McDonald’s hot coffee lawsuit involving Stella Liebeck, a 79-year-old woman who suffered third-degree burns when McDonald’s coffee spilled in her lap. Liebeck was awarded $160,000 in compensatory damages and $2.7 million in punitive damages, though the award was later reduced to $480,000. The parties eventually settled for a confidential sum reported to be less than $500,000.
Much like the McDonald’s case, Garcia’s lawsuit raises broader questions about corporate responsibility and the safety of serving hot beverages. While Starbucks insists it followed proper procedures, the jury’s swift decision suggests otherwise — and the $50 million award underscores the jury’s belief that Starbucks failed to meet its duty of care.
Garcia’s ordeal, both physically and emotionally, highlights the devastating consequences that can arise from even a small lapse in attention to detail. The financial outcome may provide some relief, but as Rowley pointed out, the damage to Garcia’s life is permanent. For Starbucks, the legal battle isn’t over — but the size of the verdict signals that juries are willing to hold corporations accountable when safety standards fall short.
👇👇👇 IF YOU NEED A LAWYER CONTACT US TODAY👇👇👇