A New York woman is taking legal action against McDonald’s after claiming an order of fries was so hot that it left her with burns to her mouth and tongue.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

According to a civil complaint filed in New York State Supreme Court, Catherine Luongo alleges she suffered “serious and severe personal injuries and burns to [her] mouth and tongue, as a result of being served extremely hot fries” during a visit to a McDonald’s restaurant in Manhattan.

The lawsuit stems from an incident on March 5 at the chain’s East 42nd Street location, opposite Bryant Park.

In the complaint, Luongo claims employees “fail[ed] to provide [her] with a safe order of fries,” arguing the food she was served had been “overheated and not safe for human consumption.”

She alleges she should never have been “permitt[ed] and allow[ed]” to “be served and consume extremely hot and overheated fries”, The Independent reports.

The filing further argues that she was not adequately warned about “the dangers to be encountered” before eating them.

According to the complaint, the incident occurred “due solely… [to] the carelessness, recklessness and negligence” of the employees involved in preparing the order.

It also maintains that “the aforesaid occurrence was due solely by reason of the negligence of the Defendants,” and happened “through no fault or lack of care” on Luongo’s part.

Beyond the alleged burns to her mouth and tongue, the complaint says Luongo suffered additional physical and emotional effects.

It claims she endured “a severe shock to the nervous system,” “suffered great physical pain and mental anguish,” and “was confined to bed and home and caused to abstain from usual duties and activities.”

The lawsuit also states she was “forced to seek medical aid and attention,” paying for that treatment herself, and alleges her injuries “may be permanent and lasting.”

No further details about the specific injuries are included in the complaint.

Luongo is seeking damages that, according to the filing, “exceeds the jurisdictional limits of all lower Courts,” with the exact amount to be determined during a trial.

McDonald’s did not respond to a request for comment from The Independent.

While lawsuits involving hot food often generate headlines, this is far from the first time a fast-food chain has faced legal action over alleged burn injuries.

In 2013, a Massachusetts mother sued McDonald’s after her three-year-old daughter reportedly suffered first and second-degree burns to her thighs from what the lawsuit described as “unreasonably and dangerously hot” fries.

The complaint stated:

“As a direct and proximate cause of the unreasonably and dangerously hot French Fries, M.C. is now disfigured and scarred.”

“M.C. is undergoing surgery due to the disfigurement and scarring.”

That same year, a Florida jury awarded a woman $800,000 after her four-year-old daughter sustained second-degree burns when a hot Chicken McNugget allegedly became trapped between the child’s leg and her seat belt.

During that case, McDonald’s lawyers argued the McNuggets needed to be cooked to a sufficient temperature to reduce the risk of salmonella and contended the food “were not meant to be pressed between a seat belt and human flesh for more than two minutes.”

Similar claims have also been brought against other food businesses.

In 2009, the family of a Boston-area toddler sued Dunkin’ Donuts after the child allegedly suffered “serious and permanent burn injuries” from a hash brown.

Although the outside of the item was reportedly “lukewarm,” the lawsuit claimed it had been heated unevenly and that the inside was so hot it was “unsafe for public consumption.”

Perhaps the most famous case involving hot food remains Stella Liebeck’s lawsuit against McDonald’s in the 1990s.

Often cited as an example of a supposedly frivolous lawsuit, the case has since become widely misunderstood.

Liebeck, who was 79 at the time, suffered severe third-degree burns after spilling extremely hot coffee onto herself, resulting in permanent tissue damage.

She spent a week in hospital, several weeks recovering at home, and later underwent further hospital treatment involving debridement and skin grafts.

Before filing a lawsuit, Liebeck reportedly offered to settle the matter for around $20,000 to cover her medical expenses.

When that was unsuccessful, the case proceeded to trial.

A jury ultimately awarded her $2.7 million in punitive damages, although the amount was later reduced by a judge to $480,000, who described McDonald’s conduct as “willful, wanton, reckless” and “callous.”

Cases like these often centre on where the line should be drawn between food that is expected to be hot and food that is allegedly served at temperatures capable of causing injury.

Food service businesses have frequently argued that adults understand hot food and drinks carry an “open and obvious” risk of burns.

However, legal arguments in these cases have also maintained that when products are allegedly served at temperatures capable of causing serious injury during normal use, consumers should receive clear warnings.

Whether Luongo’s claims meet that legal threshold will ultimately be decided as her case moves through the courts.

Featured image credit: Pexels/Polina Tankilevitch/Samuel Figueroa (Free-to-use)