$50 Million Starbucks Lawsuit: When Delivery Boy Suffered Permanent Disfigurement In California

• In February 2020, a delivery driver in LA’s Starbucks drive-through suffered from permanent disfigurement as the boiling hot beverage spilled over his genital area.
• Following a trial that same year, the jury at the Los Angeles court found “Starbucks 100% liable” and awarded the plaintiff $50 million as compensation in the lawsuit.
• While Starbucks expressed sympathy towards Garcia, the plaintiff, the director of Corporate Communications stated that the award for the damages was excessive.

In 2020, a hot coffee incident at Starbucks was in the spotlight. As reported by CNN Business, a jury in California decided that Starbucks is to give $50 million in compensation to a delivery driver who suffered severe burns from a hot drink spillage.

However, this is not the only example where the need of the companies to ensure the safety of their clients is highlighted.

According to Bottaro Law Firm, the $50 million Starbucks lawsuit has many aspects in common with the notorious McDonald’s coffee lawsuit, with consumer safety as the central issue and personal injury law as the field.

In this article, I will explain:

• What is the $50 million Starbucks lawsuit about?
• The legal proceedings and impact of the case.
• How Starbucks responded to the personal injury lawsuit.

So, if these are some of the things that you want to know, keep on reading this blog till the end…

Background To The $50 Million Starbucks Lawsuit

In February 2020, delivery driver Michael Garcia visited a Starbucks drive-through in Los Angeles to pick up drinks. He was handed a tray holding multiple venti-sized “Medicine Ball” teas.

Allegedly, one of the drinks was not properly secured. Mere seconds after receiving the tray, a hot tea spilled onto his lap. This resulted in severe burns and lasting disfigurement to his genital area.

In an interview with Courthouse News, Garcia mentioned that he “suffered severe burns, disfigurement and debilitating nerve damage to his genitals.” Additionally, he noted that the injury has impacted him so deeply that “both sex and masturbation are painful experiences” post the accident.

Following a jury trial that same year, a Los Angeles County jury issued a verdict in favor of Garcia. He was awarded a compensating amount of $50 million in damages for pain, suffering, future treatment, and the permanent impact on his quality of life.

The legal team representing Garcia emphasized the life-altering nature of the injuries. In their Instagram post, the Garcia’s attorneys stated:

“After a hospitalization and multiple skin grafts, Michael has lived for five years with the disfigurement, pain, dysfunction, and psychological harm caused by the burns.”

In one of their articles on the lawsuit, The Guardian mentioned how Nick Rowley, one of Garcia’s attorneys, felt about the verdict.

However, as the plaintiff’s side was trying its best to justify the damages award, it was not the same for the billion-dollar company.

While Starbucks empathized with Garcia, they signaled their intention to appeal, deeming the award excessive despite expressing sympathy.

Key Parties Involved

Here are the people who were part of the $50 million Starbucks lawsuit:

Plaintiff	Michael Garcia, a Postmates delivery driver at the time of the accident
Plaintiff’s Legal Team	Nicholas Rowley (Trial Lawyers for Justice) and Daniel Bidegaray (Bidegaray Law Firm LLC)
Defense	Starbucks, represented by law firms including Price Pelletier LLP (Stephen Pelletier) and Williams & Connolly (Rich Moore)
Judge	Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Frederick Shaller, who denied Starbucks’ motions for a new trial or reduction of the verdict

Legal Proceedings, Trial Details, And Evidence In The $50 Million Starbucks Burn Lawsuit

After Garcia filed the personal injury lawsuit in court, it took little time or the jury to rule in his favor. As reported by the Expert Institute, the trial was conducted in detail in two phases. These were:

• Liability phase.
• Damages phase.

During the liability phase, jurors found Starbucks 100% liable, with no contributory negligence assigned to Garcia. “The panel ruled 11-1 that Garcia bore no negligence in the incident,” stated Expert Institute.

Evidence included surveillance footage from the drive-through. It clearly showed the improperly seated drink falling almost immediately after being handed to Garcia.

The NY Times mentioned that in the complaint, Garcia’s legal team stated that the company and the staff at the drive-through “did not securely fasten the lids of each hot beverage that were negligently, carelessly and recklessly served” to him.

In his closing argument, Rowley explained to the judges that the “experience left him with third-degree burns to his penis, groin and inner thighs.” They continued to mention how Garcia’s incident had impacted “every facet of his life.” 

During the damages phase, Garcia’s attorneys sought damages in the range of $75 million to $125 million. 

According to Courtroom View Networks’ recording of the verdict of the $50 Million Starbucks lawsuit, the damages included:

• Mental anguish.
• Physical pain.
• Physical impairment.
• Loss of enjoyment of life.
• Inconvenience and grief.
• Humiliation.
• Anxiety and emotional distress.

As stated by Anzalone Law, “Starbucks argued for a lower amount” and proposed between $7.5 million to $10 million. 

However, the jury finally agreed on the $50 million compensatory amount. This “verdict was the third highest personal injury payout of 2025,” reports Expert Institute.

How Did Starbucks Respond To The Verdict?

Starbucks issued a statement expressing sympathy toward Garcia but firmly stating their disagreement with the jury’s decision and the magnitude of the verdict.

“We disagree with the jury’s decision that we were at fault for this incident and believe the damages awarded to be excessive,” Director of Corporate Communications Jaci Anderson mentioned in a statement to The Times.

The company affirmed its commitment to safety standards around hot beverages and signaled plans to appeal the judgment.

Settlement Offers, Negotiations And Conditions

There were a lot of settlement offers that went back and forth from Starbucks to Garcia and his legal team.

Firstly, they wanted to settle the case with a compensatory amount of $3 million. They believed this was the duty of care they owed to the plaintiff. However, Garcia declined.

Subsequently, an offer of $30 million was made, which Garcia conditionally accepted—only if Starbucks issued a public apology and instituted policy changes to ensure drink safety.

However, Starbucks wanted confidentiality and, therefore, they rejected these terms, leading to the case proceeding to trial.

Cases Similar To The $50 Million Starbucks Lawsuit

The case draws strong parallels to the famous McDonald’s “hot coffee” lawsuit of the early 1990s.

In that case, Stella Liebeck was initially awarded nearly $3 million after suffering severe burns and being hospitalized for more than a week. Courthouse News states that the jury held McDonald’s 80% at fault, hence the plaintiff was only awarded for punitive damages.

However, it was “later reduced the award to $480,000 and the parties settled for a confidential sum reported to be less than $500,000.”

Irrespective, the case has frequently served as a cautionary reference in discussions around negligence and punitive damages.

With a 100% liability, Garcia’s case serves as a wake-up call for corporations regarding consumer safety, particularly relating to the handling of hot products.

It reinforces the principle that negligence—even in routine service interactions like handing off hot drinks—can have catastrophic consequences and result in massive legal liabilities.

Garcia’s conditional acceptance of the settlement demonstrates how plaintiffs can leverage not only financial compensation but also demand accountability and policy reform.

Starbucks’ planned appeal may become a test case on award propriety and the boundaries of personal injury damages in similar contexts.

Read Also:

• CP4 Fuel Pump Silverado Sierra Lawsuit: How Can You Claim Your Settlement Amount?
• Dapper Development Lawsuit: What It Means and Why It Matters
• Gerber Lawsuit: Why Baby Food Companies Are Getting Sued