(FreePressBeacon.com) – In a groundbreaking decision, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled Thursday that “boneless” chicken wings do not necessarily mean they have to be without bones.
By doing so, the court resolved a lawsuit that started when a man encountered a chicken bone while eating what was marketed as a boneless wing.
In 2016, while dining at a local wing restaurant in Hamilton, Ohio, Michael Berkheimer ordered boneless wings in parmesan garlic sauce.
According to the lawsuit, he experienced complications after accidentally swallowing a chicken bone.
Three days after the meal, Berkheimer developed a fever and could not keep food down, which forced him to seek emergency medical care.
At the hospital, a doctor found a long, thin bone in his esophagus that had caused a tear and an infection.
The lawsuit read that “Michael Berkheimer sued a restaurant, its food supplier, and a chicken farm after he suffered serious medical problems resulting from getting a chicken bone lodged in his throat while he was eating a ‘boneless wing’ served by the restaurant.”
The justices explained, “There is no breach of a duty when the consumer could have reasonably expected and guarded against the presence of the injurious substance in the food.”
The court further noted that the term “boneless wing” should be seen as a description of the cooking style rather than a guarantee of no bones.
“A diner reading ‘boneless wings’ on a menu would no more believe that the restaurant was warranting the absence of bones in the items than believe that the items were made from chicken wings, just as a person eating ‘chicken fingers’ would know that he had not been served fingers,” they stated.
“The food item’s label on the menu described a cooking style; it was not a guarantee,” they added.
However, the decision was not unanimous. Three of the seven justices dissented, arguing the common expectation of consumers regarding “boneless” food items.
“Does anyone really believe that the parents in this country who feed their young children boneless wings or chicken tenders or chicken nuggets or chicken fingers expect bones to be in the chicken?” they questioned.
“Of course they don’t,” the dissenting justices affirmed. “When they read the word ‘boneless,’ they think that it means ‘without bones,’ as do all sensible people.”
Copyright 2024, FreePressBeacon.com
