Press "PandaGuides" above to follow us!
In a recent ruling, the Ohio Supreme Court addressed a peculiar yet significant issue: whether consumers can expect "boneless" chicken wings to be completely free of bones.
This decision emerged from a lawsuit filed by Michael Berkheimer, who experienced severe medical complications after consuming a "boneless" wing that contained a bone.
The case raised questions about consumer expectations and product labeling, ultimately leading to a split decision from the state's highest court.
The Ohio Supreme Court has ruled that consumers cannot expect boneless chicken wings to be entirely free of bones. This decision came after Berkheimer, a restaurant patron, suffered serious medical complications after he reportedly ate a "boneless wing" that did in fact contain a bone in it.
Berkheimer was dining at Wings on Brookwood in Hamilton, Ohio, when he felt a bone get stuck in his throat while eating boneless wings with parmesan garlic sauce.
Days later, he was hospitalized, and doctors discovered a bone had torn his esophagus, causing an infection. Berkheimer subsequently sued the restaurant, its supplier, and the chicken farm, alleging negligence.
In a 4-3 decision, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the term "boneless wings" refers to a cooking style, not a guarantee of no bones. Justice Joseph T. Deters, writing for the majority, explained that diners should not expect boneless wings to be entirely free of bones, likening it to other menu items like "chicken fingers," which are not actually fingers.
"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," Deters wrote for the majority.
Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk
