Overview of the Case

An Ohio Supreme Court ruling clarified the expectations around boneless chicken wings. This stems from a case involving Michael Berkheimer, who experienced a medical emergency after consuming a piece of chicken that contained a bone.

Details of the Incident

Michael Berkheimer was dining with his wife and friends at a restaurant in Hamilton, Ohio. He ordered boneless wings with parmesan garlic sauce but soon felt discomfort in his throat. After three days of fever and difficulty swallowing, Berkheimer visited the emergency room. A doctor found a bone had punctured his esophagus, causing infection.

Legal Action and Court Ruling

Berkheimer sued Wings on Brookwood, the restaurant where the incident occurred. He claimed the establishment failed to warn patrons that boneless wings might still contain bones. The lawsuit also involved the chicken supplier and farm.

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled 4-3 against Berkheimer. The majority opinion stated that ‘boneless wings’ describe a cooking style, not a guarantee of being bone-free. The court determined that consumers should be aware that chicken can have bones.

Majority Opinion

Justice Joseph T. Deters wrote the majority opinion. He emphasized that reading ‘boneless wings’ on a menu doesn’t imply a guarantee of no bones. Just as ‘chicken fingers’ aren’t literal fingers, diners should not expect chicken meat completely devoid of bones.

Dissenting Opinion

Dissenting justices disagreed with the majority. Justice Michael P. Donnelly criticized the ruling for disregarding consumer expectations. He argued that the term ‘boneless’ implies no bones, noting parents feeding children chicken tenders do not anticipate bones in the meat.

Ultimately, the court’s decision reflects a divided interpretation of consumer expectations in dining.