A consumer has filed a lawsuit alleging that she became ill after eating a chicken salad containing “hard, gray-colored granules” with a “foul odor and taste” at a location of Bojangles Famous Chicken 'n Biscuits. Green v. Bojangles Restaurants, Inc., No. 17-2936 (D.S.C., removed to federal court October 30, 2017). The plaintiff asserts that she ordered a Roasted Chicken Bites salad that contained the granules, which she ate because she purportedly thought they were pieces of feta cheese. The plaintiff contends that she immediately became ill and vomited at the restaurant, while her husband took the granules to the restaurant owner, who apparently indicated he would have them tested at a laboratory. The plaintiff also argues that after the incident, she developed “nodules or growths” in her throat that remained for about 18 months. Claiming strict liability, breach of implied warranty, negligence, negligence per se and loss of consortium, the plaintiff…
Tag Archives South Carolina
A South Carolina federal court has ruled that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was not negligent in issuing a tomato recall during a 2008 outbreak of Salmonella, dismissing a tomato farm's claim of $15 million in damages. Seaside Farm Inc. v. U.S., No. 11-1199 (D.S.C., order entered December 16, 2015). The farm had argued that FDA should have been more specific in its recall, while FDA argued it never issued an official recall, only warnings about tomatoes. The court had previously dismissed allegations of defamation and takings against the government. Issue 588
A federal court in South Carolina has dismissed three of four claims in a lawsuit filed by a family farming operation that claims the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) 2008 tomato recall, which later proved unnecessary as the agency conceded that tomatoes were not the source of the Salmonella contamination, caused the farm substantial economic harm. Seaside Farm, Inc. v. United States, No. 11-1199 (D.S.C., decided March 6, 2012). Further details about the litigation appear in Issue 395 of this Update. The court dismissed the plaintiff’s Takings Clause claim, the claim that FDA violated the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act and the defamation claim. The plaintiff’s negligence claim will, however, proceed. While the court suggested that this may actually be a claim for defamation and thus may also be subject to dismissal under the Federal Tort Claims Act, because the defendant did not seek to dismiss on this ground, the court declined…
Another tomato grower has filed a claim for damages against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), alleging that the agency announced a nationwide recall of all tomatoes in the United States in 2008 without having identified tomatoes as the source of a Salmonella outbreak. Williams Farms Produce Sales, Inc. v. United States, No. 11-01399 (D.S.C., filed June 8, 2011). Details about similar claims also filed in a South Carolina federal court appear in Issue 395 of this Update. According to the complaint, FDA ultimately conceded that tomatoes were not the source of the Salmonella contamination, but not before the price for tomatoes plunged. Alleging negligence, defamation, slander of title, product/ commercial disparagement, unconstitutional taking, and violation of unfair trade practices law, the plaintiff seeks actual damages in excess of $11 million, special damages, compensatory damages, treble damages, attorney’s fees, and costs.
A South Carolina-based family farming operation has filed a complaint seeking damages that it alleges were sustained in 2008 when the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a nationwide recall of round tomatoes due to a purported Salmonella outbreak. Seaside Farm, Inc. v. United States, No. 11-1199 (D.S.C., filed May 18, 2011). The plaintiff claims that independent audits before the recall was announced verified that its produce and practices were safe. Still, according to the complaint, “At the time of the recall, the FDA had not positively identified a single tomato as a current source of the salmonella outbreak in the United States” and “The FDA never identified any contaminated tomatoes and ultimately conceded that tomatoes were not the source of the salmonella contamination.” Claiming that the recall “decimated the market price for fresh tomatoes,” the plaintiff seeks unspecified general and special compensatory damages and interest under the Federal Tort Claims Act.…
South Carolina poultry production line workers have reportedly sued their employer, claiming they are not paid for the time they spend donning and removing safety gear. According to a news source, the complaint alleges that this can extend a worker’s shift by some 75 minutes each day. The employees also alleged that they are required to stand in line before clocking in to start their shifts so they can purchase the protective gear they need, such as gloves, hair nets, face masks, earplugs, and arm sleeves. Apparently, this gear is damaged regularly while in use, so the workers must buy the supplies at the worksite with a company debit card several times each week. The employer has reportedly countered that it “does not consider time spent in line for supplies and time donning and doffing the minimal gear as compensable time.” According to the company, which was recently indicted for…
