SOPHISTICATED CONSUMER PRESUMED TO KNOW INHERENT DANGERS ASSOCIATED WITH HOT COFFEE

In Triche v. McDonald’s Corp., 14-318 (La. App. 5 Cir. 10/29/14), — So. 3d —, the plaintiff alleged that he was burned after an unreasonably hot cup of coffee fell out of defendant’s cup holder and spilled onto his leg and foot. The plaintiff asserted that defendant’s employee had failed to properly secure the coffee cup in the cup holder.The court noted that defendant’s duty to protect its patrons includes use of “to go” paper products by employees at drive-thru windows. However, the court upheld the dismissal of the claim because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the coffee was excessively hot or that the restaurant failed to properly secure the cups in the tray holder. In discussing whether the coffee was so hot as to be considered an unreasonably dangerous product under the Louisiana Products Liability Act, the court also determined that the plaintiff was a sophisticated consumer of coffee and therefore presumed to know the inherent danger associated with hot liquids.