State Supreme Court weighs in on whether boneless wings can contain bones

In weird news, the Ohio Supreme Court has settled the argument on boneless wings because apparently there was one.

A 4-3 decision explained that despite the name being “boneless,” customers shouldn’t actually expect that their wings will never contain bones or bone fragments

The case was brought before the court by a customer who had accidentally ingested a bone while enjoying some supposedly boneless wings at Wings on Brookwood in Hamilton, Ohio. A few days after the visit, he began vomiting and came down with a fever. A trip to the emergency room revealed that a piece of bone had become lodged in his esophagus, creating an infection and causing his symptoms.

The man sued the wing joint for not making him aware that the “boneless” style wings could still, in fact, contain bones or bone fragments. He also named the supplier of the wings in his suit, alleging their negligence played a part in his suffering.

At the end of the day, the state Supreme Court sided against the customer saying that “boneless” does not refer to the lack of bone in the meat, but instead to a cooking style. All customers should be aware that the wings they are eating may still contain bones or bone fragments since chickens have bones and there is a non-zero chance of them getting into the final wing product.

Writing for the majority, Justice Joseph T. Deters made a humorous analogy in explaining the court’s decision:

“A diner reading ‘boneless wings’ on a menu would no more believe that the restaurant was warranting the absence of bones in the items than believe that the items were made from chicken wings, just as a person eating ‘chicken fingers’ would know that he had not been served fingers.”

However, the judges that dissented from the ruling deemed Deters’ reasoning to be “utter jabberwocky.”

“The question must be asked: Does anyone really believe that the parents in this country who feed their young children boneless wings or chicken tenders, or chicken nuggets or chicken fingers expect bones to be in the chicken? Of course, they don’t,” wrote Justice Michael P. Donnelly. “When they read the word ‘boneless,’ they think that it means ‘without bones,’ as do all sensible people.”

DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW

Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!