this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
347 points (97.5% liked)

Not The Onion

16334 readers
3039 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

HOUSTON — A Houston man is suing Whataburger for nearly $1 million after he says his burger had onions on it.

Turns out he had asked for a no-onions order.

On July 24, 2024, Demery Ardell Wilson had an allergic reaction after eating a burger that had onions on it at Whataburger, court documents say. He alleges that he requested the fast-food chain to take them off before serving him the burger.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 week ago (23 children)

On the other hand, if you're deathly allergic to something as common as onions, you probably shouldn't rely on fast food workers to keep you alive.

If you're serving food to the public you should probably be careful not to kill them.

[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 week ago (15 children)

It's a nice ideal, but historically the companies don't think like that and in most cases the workers don't get paid enough to be that passionate. 4/5-star restaurants? Sure. Not fast food, though.

Also consider the sheer amount of food orders a fast food place gets in a day, especially with things like DoorDash on top of in-person and drive-thru.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

I get where you're coming from. But I still disagree.

What you describe makes sense from a realistic standpoint BUT I don't see why we shouldn't hold corporations to a higher standard since they are selling this exact higher standard to us.

Yes Fastfood workers likely aren't paid enough to care about customized orders but that isn't a ME problem. It's the company's problem since they can't keep up with their promises. So time to hold them responsible.

Also my two cents to add to the general issue: if I can't cater to custom needs or don't want to, I can still lie to the customer and tell them it's not possible instead of risking to kill them through my apathy.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

What responsibility, if any, does the customer bear in avoiding harm to himself?

The onions in question are a burger topping, and are readily discoverable if the customer checks their order. I think that the customer with the special requirement can be reasonably expected to verify their order meets their needs before incurring harm.

I believe he's already suing Sonic for the same issue. He knew (or should have known) this was a mistake that restaurants can potentially make, yet he apparently made no effort of his own to mitigate the risk by checking his food before eating.

I would argue that it is "reckless" for the customer to blindly trust the worker fulfilled the special instructions, and that this "recklessness" is the primary cause of the harm incurred.

I would say that the restaurant's liability here is the cost of the "defective" burger.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)