The fact that so many people believe that case involved regular "hot coffee" like you'd get at a diner is an example of how crooked the media was even back then, and how easy it is for big corporations to mislead the public. The food and beverage industry spent millions to push the narrative that this was a frivolous lawsuit about clumsiness and minor injuries.
The jury had the facts: McDonalds was serving coffee at 190 degrees, hot enough to cause third degree burns in two to three seconds on exposed skin and 20 to 30 degrees higher than most restaurants serve coffee. The woman suffered third degree burns to six percent of her body and required skin grafts. And most importantly: McDonalds knew of at least 700 scalding incidents in the previous ten years, but did nothing to make their product safer, either by improving the design of the cup or reducing the temperature of the coffee.
So the jury found the woman 20% responsible, because she did spill the coffee on herself. And they found McDonalds 80% liable, because they recklessly ignored the danger of serving a liquid that hot in a paper cup at a drive through window. But as soon as the story broke, big corporations like McDonalds, Dunkin Donuts, and their industry trade groups did a media blitz to shape a narrative that this was a frivolous suit and McDonalds was the victim of a greedy lawyer.