The US is so crazy when it comes to this. In Europe you'd almost always just sue for actual damages, which because of healthcare are pretty low. You could get a small amount in cash but nothing crazy. Suing just to get money is stupid.
this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
333 points (97.4% liked)
Not The Onion
16278 readers
930 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:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...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
Unfortunately, that's just how they've set up our legal system to handle cases of negligence causing healthcare fees.
I ordered a burger the other day and it had no cheese on it for some reason. I did not realise I should have been contacting my lawyer .
I asked for light ice in my drink the other day and they gave me the regular amount of ice. Had my lawyer draft a demand letter for infinity billion dollars within the hour.
Remember, the mcdonalds lady got mocked in the media for suing, dont just assume based off of the headlines.
She had third-degree burns on her vagina and needed plastic surgery to fix it. It must have been horribly painful.
Almost as bad as getting onions.
Edit: woosh
Her ordeal wasn't a joke, and McDonald's was directly responsible for the slander that she endured in the media. She definitely deserved the millions that were awarded to her.
Woosh
I hope someone makes a joke of the terrible disfiguring pain you have one day. I'll laugh when that happens to you. Have a great day!
He has a fucking allergy to onions, which he made clear.
Stop acting like he's sueing because his order was wrong- the lawsuit because they nearly killed him.
I always side with the underdogs, food allergens need to be respected.
He also tried to sue Sonic in 2024. Seems like his thing is to order a burger with no onions on it, then whenever the restaurants fucks up he sues them. He’s just trying to get paid
If the restaurants change their safety and handling practices as a result then I hope he does get paid. Just like how I support that guy who searches for raptor bones around telephone and power poles to sue the companies for not using plastic caps over the metal components preventing the touching of hot to ground which kills the birds. We need more of these people.
EDIT: This kind of Raptor (image below)
Oh so not an archaeologist then...
Dinosaurs are cool.
Raptors include Hawks, Owls, some Vultures, and Eagles.
Respectfully, we do not need more people thinking they are searching for raptor bones around telephone and power poles to prevent the eradication of an entire species.
What’s fun about science is that a lot of people don’t understand that a good scientist will always challenge you to question their methodology, analysis, results, the whole enchilada. We advance by challenging each other and making someone defend their research. Peer review, while harsh at times, allows us to grow and innovate in ways “yes” men will never achieve.
Featuring in this community! Because... Onions!
The guy ate the onion..
Oh no! NOT THE ONIONS!
If you have a allergy to onions wouldn't you check a burger before eating it? I mean, who blindly trusts fast food workers that much?
People with an EpiPen and a need for $1m
Back in June 2024, Wilson also sued Sonic for including onions on a burger.
Honestly.... It's not even the sketchiest business model out there.
basically just vigilante food inspection
Given that he is allergic, it's a reasonable thing to do, isn't it? Or is the health and safety of people with allergies not relevant?
On the one hand, I agree with you.
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.
I've got a friend with actual Celiac's disease. To the point where a drop of wheat could be the end of him. He does not take this kind of chance, ever. He trusts me to cook for him, but I care about his existence beyond just being a customer.
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.
Do you really expect some of the lowest wage workers working in likely shit conditions with shit managers to get 100% of orders right?
Also, if I'm deathly allergic to something like onions then I will absolutely check everything I didn't prepare myself.
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.
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.
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
(9 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
I worked fast food for a while. Sometimes we were so busy and understaffed that things became very hectic very quick. More than once, I forgot the meat on a hamburger order.
I can understand, from the employee perspective, how this could happen. It's very doubtful it was purposeful.
I don't think I've ever seen a McDonalds franchise fully staffed. They don't get enough business to have that many employees, but you can be sure they get enough business that it's too much for the employees they do have on staff when a rush comes.
load more comments
(17 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
On the one hand, I hate onions. So I totally get it. I wish I could sue every time someone sticks one in my food as a disgusting surprise too.
On the other hand, if you have a food allergy, that is different than just requesting "no onion" on your burger. They have to take steps to prevent cross contamination. It is a whole thing, and he should know that if he is really that allergic. He would be having this issue all the time becuase (as I well know and lament as an onion hater) onions are in a ton of foods everywhere you go.
They would only be negligent and liable if he told them that he was allergic and they claimed to have taken precautions to prevent exposure of his food. If he just asked for no onions and had an allergic reaction because they messed up his order like every fast food restaurant in the world does sometimes, that is not gross negligence, that is a standard accident.
That would be the store's best defense unless he claimed that the onions needed to be removed because of an allergy.
To the restaurant, it's just an oops mistake. I've very often seen cross-contamination at places which assemble your burger or sub. Those little trays that hold the onions, pickles, lettuce, etc. very often have contamination from one of the neighboring trays.
Also, if he has an allergy to onions, why not check the burger before eating it? It's not like onions are a hidden ingredient.
This case seems like a nothing burger, tbh. 🤭
I'm pretty certain that if you actually said to them that you wanted the onions removed because you were allergic to onions they would probably tell you they can't guarantee there won't be cross-contamination.
Hell they probably don't use different tongues for onions as they do lettuce so it's practically a guarantee they will be cross-contamination.
Having worked in food, there are specific allergy protocols that are observed when a food allergy is declared, at least if the restaurant doesn't suck ass.
However you are correct, there is a warning usually in the menu somewhere that says they can't promise food won't be cross contaminated
I once had a friend who claimed to be allergic to onions and his flatmates managed to prove it was a lie..... By trying to kill him.
This is a surprisingly common thing that people with food allergies deal with. My partner is allergic to bananas, (they’re closely related to latex, which is an extremely common allergy) and has had anaphylaxis triggered multiple times from people trying to test it. People just randomly hide bananas in gifted food, to see if they’re really allergic. It has happened so many times that my partner actively refuses to eat baked goods unless they saw it get made.
The worst part is that the allergy runs in my partner’s family. So it’s not like they’re the only one who is allergic.
I’m convinced it’s due to projection. The people prone to lying are likely the ones who feel the need to test it, because they assume that everyone else lies a lot too.
There's a great Carolyn Hax advice column from years ago where the writer's partner was vegetarian because he was actually allergic to meat.
Writer's family thinks it's a lie and sneaks meat into a meal. That results in a ride in the "screaming white bus," as Carolyn put it, to the hospital.
The writer defended her family and insisted it was just a joke, and partner was taking it too seriously. I've left out a lot of detail, but Carolyn basically tells the partner he should run from this relationship.
You misunderstand. They were genuinely attempting to murder him. He was a kleptomaniac, compulsive liar, antisocial personality disorder. Just a very unpleasant influence in their lives. I think the final straw was when he stole one of their bank cards and emptied their account.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Really should put him being allergic in the title there.
When i read the title i knew it was gonna be an allergy thing and yup i was right. Maybe not 1mil but allergies are serious.
Yeah, this story hit me kinda like the McDonald's hot coffee incident; it seemed silly and frivolous on the surface until you realize just how much danger the person could've actually been in.
Though I'm loving the comments in this thread. The arguments over corporate responsibility vs personal responsibility are pretty interesting!
Damn, he really ate the onion on that one...
view more: next ›