Vondran Legal® - Tatte Coffee Burn in Washington D.C. - and Zurich Insurance tough guys.  What's wrong with our system of justice in America

By Attorney Steve Vondran, civil litigation attorney.

The following describes my personal experience, observations, allegations, and opinions concerning an incident involving my wife and coffee purchased from Tatte Bakery & Cafe in Washington, D.C., as well as our subsequent insurance claim with their insurer Zurich Liability has not been adjudicated, and readers should understand disputed matters described below as allegations unless otherwise indicated.

My wife, Lisa, and I recently traveled to Washington, D.C. expecting to enjoy our time with family graduation together. Instead, early in our trip, Lisa suffered what I believe was a serious and entirely avoidable hot-coffee burn after we purchased coffee from Tatte Bakery & Cafe.

I am writing about what happened because, after more than two decades as a litigation attorney, I have serious concerns about what I personally observed, the coffee cups and lids involved, the temperature of the coffee, the response following Lisa's injury, and the handling of our subsequent claim.

This is our account.

A Morning Coffee Run That Ended With a Burn Injury - Illustrative Sample

Tatte was close to our hotel and had been recommended to us, so we went there one morning to get coffee.

The shop was busy. In my observation, there was a good number of customers inside, and the employees appeared very focused on moving customers through the line quickly.

There is nothing inherently wrong with efficiency. Busy restaurants and coffee shops obviously need to serve customers promptly.

But speed should never come at the expense of customer safety.

Lisa ordered three cups of coffee. The drinks were served in paper cups with plastic lids.

In my opinion and based on what I observed, the lids were not adequately secured, and I don't believe it is truly possible to secure these, especially on a busy morning. I also felt that the overriding emphasis appeared to be getting Lisa through the transaction and moving on to the next customer.

Lisa was not offered a drink carrier or coffee tray for the three hot beverages. My understanding is that carriers may have been available, but apparently there was no interest in offering safety.

What happened next turned a simple morning coffee run into an injury that affected our entire family trip.

The Coffee Lid Came Off

As Lisa handled the coffees, a lid came off.

Extremely hot coffee spilled onto her forearm.

She was severly burned.

In my opinion, the coffee was extraordinarily hot—far hotter than I believe a consumer should reasonably expect to come into contact with because of a lid failure and failure to help prevent this.

Seeing your spouse unexpectedly burned while you are supposed to be enjoying a vacation is upsetting. Seeing her pain sucks.  Sleeping was not possible.  We weren't looking for a dispute. We weren't looking for a lawsuit. We weren't looking for an insurance claim.

We just wanted local coffee.

Instead, Lisa was dealing with a painful burn during the early part of our Washington, D.C. trip.

I Immediately Told a Tatte Employee My Wife Had Been Burned

After Lisa was burned, I approached a barista and told him what had happened.

I said, in substance:

"My wife was burned. Can you please help?"

I was given a relatively small bag of ice.

What particularly concerned me was what, according to my recollection,did not happen.

I do not recall anyone asking meaningful questions about how badly Lisa had been burned. I do not recall an employee taking an incident report in our presence. I do not recall anyone getting a manager to investigate what happened. I do not recall anyone documenting the cup or lid. And I did not perceive any meaningful concern about the injury.  None whatsoever.

We sat there while Lisa iced her arm. We drank our coffee, and eventually we left.

Again, we were on vacation. We wanted to enjoy Washington, D.C., not spend our trip dealing with an injury from a cup of coffee.  This was nothing more than the recommended local coffee shop.

Then Something Else Happened That Got My Attention

What happened next is one of the reasons I became particularly concerned about the coffee lids.

Our brother-in-law was staying with us. The next day, he went back to Tatte for coffee.

Why go back?

Simple. The coffee was actually good, and the location was convenient.

Nobody was trying to manufacture evidence or create another incident. He simply went to get coffee being close and good.

According to what occurred with that purchase, his lid also came off.

Thankfully, to my knowledge, this did not result in another serious burn.

But from my perspective as both a consumer and an attorney, having another lid come off during a separate purchase raised a serious question:

Was Lisa's experience really an isolated occurrence?

That is a question I believe deserves an answer.  I can only assume there are many others who have been silenced by Tatte Coffee and their insurer Zurich.

My Concerns About Tatte's Coffee Cups and Lids

In my opinion, a container intended to hold very hot coffee needs to safely perform its most fundamental function: contain the coffee.

Consumers carrying takeaway coffee reasonably expect the lid to remain attached during normal handling.

Where coffee is served at temperatures capable of causing a significant burn, the integrity and fit of the cup-and-lid system become even more important.

Based upon our experience, I have serious concerns about whether the cup-and-lid combination involved was reasonably safe.

Those concerns include:

• Whether the lids adequately and consistently secure to the cups;

• Whether employees properly secure and check the lids before handing drinks to customers;

• Whether customers ordering multiple hot beverages should routinely be offered drink carriers;

• Whether the temperature at which the coffee is served creates an unreasonable burn hazard when combined with a foreseeable spill or lid failure;

• Whether Tatte had notice of any previous problems involving lids, cups, spills, or burns; and

• Whether adequate policies exist for responding to customers who report burn injuries.

These are factual questions that can be investigated.  We believe Tatte is 100% liable for negligence and strict product liability based on what we believe are CHEAP CUPS AND LIDS that are more important than safety.

Potential Negligence and Product-Liability Issues

Speaking as a litigation attorney, I believe this incident potentially raises several legal issues.

Negligence can involve questions about whether a business used reasonable care under the circumstances. Depending upon the evidence and applicable law, that could include how hot beverages are prepared, packaged, secured, handed to customers, and transported.  In DC, there has to be 100 percent negligence by Tatte (DC is a purely comparative negligence district, but that is fine; they are 100 percent responsible and could have easily avoided this.

There are also product-liability issues involving the cup and lid. In my opinion, the cup-and-lid system Lisa received was unsafe because the lid failed to remain securely attached.  If they will not own up and correct their ways, they should be liable to answer for all injuries that have occurred over the relevant period.

Whether that ultimately constitutes a legally actionable product defect would depend on the evidence, applicable law, expert analysis, and potentially the identity and role of the cup or lid manufacturer or supplier.

There are also questions involving warnings, employee training, drink carriers, temperature standards, incident reporting, and prior similar complaints.

Those are precisely the kinds of facts that discovery in litigation can uncover.  We plan to go there since we offered a measley 20k to settle which the Zurich representative Terri Diamond said was "that is very reasonable,"  But then, being an insurance adjuster, she said in essence, "10k or pound sand." We said POUND SAND.

Our Claim Was Submitted to Zurich Insurance Company

Eventually, the matter was presented to Zurich, which was handling the claim.

According to my recollection of the negotiations, we were asked for a reasonable settlement demand OVER THE PHONE.

Our initial demand was $20,000.

We were not demanding millions of dollars. We were not trying to turn a coffee burn into some astronomical claim.

We believed $20,000 represented a reasonable effort to resolve the matter.

My recollection is that the Zurich representative indicated the demand was "very reasonable" and she would be discussing with the insured/client.

I can only assume this conversation happened.  

Zurich then subsequently took the position, as communicated to us, that it would not pay more than $10,000.

We attempted to compromise.

We proposed $15,000—splitting the difference.

That proposal was rejected.

The position communicated to us was essentially $10,000 as the maximum offer.  Take it or leave it.  This was a bullish lackluster attempt at a good faith resolution of the serious personal injury claim, but given that Zurich was so bullish and, in my opinion, risking an insurance bad faith lawsuit, we had to let these powerful companies know that this was not a good faith response and we declined this, as most people would do.

We Withdrew the $20,000 Settlement Demand

At that point, our view of the case changed.

A settlement demand is an opportunity to resolve a dispute without the expense, inconvenience, uncertainty, and public nature of litigation.

Our $20,000 demand was intended to accomplish exactly that.

When the effort to compromise at $15,000 was rejected, we decided we were no longer willing to resolve the matter on the terms previously proposed.  

Accordingly, we withdrew/revoked our prior $20,000 settlement demand and increased our demand to $80,000.

Our position is straightforward: if the matter cannot be reasonably resolved early, then we believe the claim should be evaluated based upon its full damages and all legally recoverable relief supported by the evidence and applicable law.

We will see what happens.

My Concerns About Zurich's Claims Handling

I have litigated for more than 20 years, and I have strong opinions about the way insurance claims should be evaluated and handled.  My firm has represented perhaps the BEST insurance company ever in Hartford.  Personally, I would never be insured by any other compant. Zurich has no respect from me.

Based on my personal experience with this claim to date, I am highly dissatisfied with Zurich's handling of the negotiations, but that is of course their perogative.

I believe our initial 20k proposal represented a fair and good-faith attempt to resolve the matter reasonably. I believe our subsequent $15,000 compromise proposal demonstrated an additional willingness to settle.

Zurich apparently sees the matter differently.  They want to be the insurance bully, in my opinion.

To be clear, whether an insurer has committed actionable insurance "bad faith" is a legal conclusion dependent upon the applicable law, contractual relationships, facts, and evidence. I am not representing here that a court has found Zurich liable for bad faith in connection with this matter.

I am saying that, in my opinion as an attorney based upon my experience with this claim, I strongly disagree with and am deeply critical of the manner in which the claim has been handled.  My opinion is Zurich is an insurance bully, the same company that wants to deny claims you may have.  NO RESPECT HERE.

We Want to Hear From Other Tatte Customers - CLASS ACTION??

This brings me to an important reason for publishing our experience.

Has anyone else experienced a Tatte coffee lid coming off?

Has anyone else been burned by hot coffee purchased from Tatte?

Has anyone experienced a Tatte cup or lid separating, leaking, collapsing, or otherwise failing?

Has anyone reported a coffee burn or spill to Tatte?

If so, I would like to hear about your experience.

Prior similar incidents can potentially become important in litigation because they may bear on issues such as notice, foreseeability, product performance, policies, and what a company knew or should have known.

Could There Be a Class Action?

It is too early to say.

A class action cannot simply be declared because multiple consumers experience similar problems. Class certification involves specific legal requirements, and individual personal-injury claims can raise individualized issues.

However, if evidence ultimately shows that numerous consumers received the same or substantially similar allegedly defective cup-and-lid system, or were subjected to common practices creating a common safety issue, there may be grounds to investigate potential class, collective, consolidated, or other multi-claim litigation, depending upon the facts and applicable law.

That is one reason I want to hear from other consumers.

If there is a pattern, I want to know about it.

Restaurants Have a Responsibility to Put Safety Before Speed

I understand the realities of running a successful coffee shop.

Morning customers want their drinks quickly. Lines need to move. Employees are under pressure. Businesses need to make money.

But there has to be a line.

Efficiency cannot come at the expense of reasonable customer safety.

When you are handing consumers paper containers filled with extremely hot liquid, securing those containers should be taken seriously.

When someone orders three hot drinks, offering a carrier seems to me like an elementary safety measure.

And when a customer tells an employee that someone has just been burned, I believe that should trigger an appropriate injury-response procedure—not merely handing over some ice and moving on.

Businesses can move quickly and still care about safety.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

If You Were Burned or Experienced a Tatte Coffee Lid Failure, Contact Us

If you purchased coffee from Tatte Bakery & Cafe in Washington, D.C. or another Tatte location and experienced a lid failure, spill, leak, or burn, I am interested in hearing what happened.

This is particularly important if:

• A plastic lid unexpectedly popped off your coffee cup;

• Hot coffee spilled on you because the lid separated;

• You suffered a burn;

• You complained to Tatte about a cup or lid;

• An employee or manager created an incident report;

• You have photographs of the cup, lid, burn, receipt, or location;

• You sought medical treatment;

• You communicated with Tatte or an insurance company concerning the incident; or

• You experienced a similar problem even if you were fortunate enough not to be injured.

If you still possess the cup, lid, receipt, photographs, emails, medical records, or other evidence, preserve them.

Please contact our office if you would like to share your experience.

We Will Keep You Updated

We did not go to Washington, D.C. expecting to become involved in a dispute over coffee.

We went there to enjoy ourselves.

But Lisa was burned, and based upon what I personally witnessed and what subsequently happened with our brother-in-law's coffee lid, I believe there are legitimate questions that deserve answers.  Tatte provided no video, or other evidence even though requested.

I believe businesses serving extremely hot beverages have a responsibility to take reasonable precautions to protect their customers. I also believe that when customers are injured, their concerns should be treated seriously.

We have now increased our settlement demand to $80,000, and we will see where this goes.

If the matter proceeds further, there may be opportunities to investigate the cups and lids, serving temperatures, training procedures, incident reports, prior complaints, safety policies, and other potentially relevant evidence.

We will keep you updated.

---

About Attorney Steve Vondran

Attorney Steve Vondran is a litigation and intellectual property attorney with more than two decades of legal experience. He provides legal commentary and educational content through his websites, videos, podcasts, and social-media channels.

If you have experienced a Tatte Bakery & Cafe coffee burn, coffee lid failure, or similar hot-beverage incident, contact our office to discuss your experience.

This article describes the author's personal experience, allegations, observations, and opinions. Disputed factual assertions have not necessarily been adjudicated or established in court. Nothing in this article should be construed as a judicial finding of negligence, product defect, insurance bad faith, or other legal liability. Past experience does not guarantee any particular legal result. This article is for informational purposes and does not create an attorney-client relationship.