An oil and gas executive says a cup of tea left him with catastrophic burns and what his lawsuit calls 'debilitating nerve damage to his genitals'. He is now suing Starbucks.

The spill happened during a summer meeting with colleagues at a San Diego branch, according to the complaint. The man is identified in court papers as Vladimir Podlipskiy.

Staff served him a hot tea at a table the filing describes as 'unstable, loose, defective, and/or wobbly'. He was sitting there lawfully as a paying customer, it notes.

Asked to Move Closer

During the meeting, the complaint alleges, a Starbucks employee asked him multiple times to move closer to that table. The hot drink was sitting in front of him at the time.

The company knew or should have known the risk, the filing argues. Steering customers towards an unstable table with a hot drink present created a 'foreseeable risk' of a spill and a burn.

It also claims the chain owed a duty of care in how its staff speak to customers. Nobody, it argues, should be directed into a position that puts them in harm's way.

Then there is the cup itself. The tea was never properly secured, lidded or stabilised, the complaint alleges.

The chain also failed to inspect, repair, remove or stabilise the table, or to warn anyone about it, the filing claims. The drink was left standing on a hazard the company should have dealt with.

The tea spilled onto Podlipskiy's lap, groin area and genitals, the complaint says, as the direct result of an unsecured cup on an unstable table.

He was allegedly left with severe burns, disfigurement and debilitating nerve damage to his genitals. The filing also lists physical pain, mental suffering and emotional distress.

The complaint is blunt about where responsibility lies. Nothing Podlipskiy himself did, it argues, meant he should have expected an unsecured drink, an unstable table or unsafe seating.

The Wider Claim and Denial

The case goes further than one spilled drink. It treats the seating area itself as a hazard the company created and left in place.

The filing lists the wobbly table and the unsafe way the seating area was arranged around the customer and his hot tea. It also questions the decision to let people sit and drink hot beverages there at all.

Much of that turns on what the chain should have spotted first. It had a duty to inspect the premises, find unsafe conditions, put them right and warn customers, the complaint argues.

Another part of the claim goes after the staff. It accuses the company of failing to train and supervise its people on hot drink safety, on secure lids and cups, and on spotting wobbly tables.

Podlipskiy is seeking damages, including medical expenses, in amounts to be proven at trial. He also wants the costs of bringing the case.

He has asked for a jury to hear the matter. The case began in a California court and was subsequently transferred to federal.

Starbucks has denied the allegations. In a written answer, the company suggested he 'may have failed in his duty to mitigate his damages'.

In the chain's telling, that means he may not have sought medical care quickly enough. The company also points to steps he might have taken to limit any scarring the burns left behind.

A jury will now be asked whether a wobbly table and a request to move closer add up to negligence. Starbucks says they do not.

Read more