Onions, lawsuits, a million dollars: When fast food becomes a fast food trap

One bite - and then to the lawyer?

Some order a burger. Others order a lawsuit to go with it. Demery Ardell Wilson from Houston is claiming up to one million dollars in damages because he allegedly received a burger with onions despite expressly requesting no onions - and suffered a severe allergic reaction as a result.

According to his statement of claim, the fast food chain Whataburger acted negligently. He suffered "serious personal injuries" and required medical treatment. Whataburger, on the other hand, is demanding "clear evidence" - they don't just want to have the onion lawsuit handed to them.

Déjà vu with onion flavor

The curious thing is that this is not Wilson's first lawsuit of this kind. He sued Sonic Drive-in last year - again over onions. Back then, he also spoke of a massive allergic reaction. And even then, the lawsuit was not waved through without further ado: Sonic is demanding a jury trial to examine the case thoroughly.

One wonders whether Wilson has a serious medical problem or a pronounced penchant for legal proceedings, but one thing is certain: allergies can be life-threatening - but anyone who takes action against different chains several times with identical scenarios must expect skepticism. The courts are also likely to take a closer look.

What does the law say?

In the USA, lawsuits for damages are part of the legal culture. But here, too, the following applies: if you sue, you have to prove it. Anyone who claims to have expressly ordered something and then become ill must prove this in writing or with witnesses. Restaurants, on the other hand, are obliged to be careful with known allergies - especially if the customer warns of this.

But: A "no onions please" alone is not enough. If you have an allergy, you should state this explicitly and clearly when ordering - and ideally have it documented. There is a certain duty of care in gastronomy, but it has its limits. No kitchen is 100% error-free - and anyone who is particularly at risk of health problems also shares responsibility.

Onions on the burger - or on the bench?

The case is typically American - and somewhere tragicomic. Of course, if someone really has a severe onion allergy and the restaurant was negligent, then there must be consequences. Period. But two almost identical lawsuits in two years? That smells of more than just onions.

Such cases undermine confidence in genuine medical concerns. People with genuine allergies have a hard enough time as it is. When someone then uses the courts as a stage for questionable show-claims, it casts a bad light on everyone.