When you do civil cases like this people often sue tangentially related parties that have money. Like if you were pushed down the stairs at the mall you sue the mall owners because they have much more money and are more likely to just take the hit while you won't get any it f the individual. Like you don't sue the worker who have you the hot coffee that burned you, you sue McDonald's. It's kind of scummy in this case because it means it's about money and not any sort of injury. The families lost and they should have to pay up since they tried to shake up the wrong tree.
The hot coffee woman is the most misunderstood court case of all time IMO. She had 3rd degree burns from the coffee, look up pictures . I remember thinking she was after money for the longest time too, she deserved every penny she got. Coffee should have not been nearly as hot as it was