BREAKING: When Do Chicken Bones Count as "Boneless Chicken?"

When the absurd Ohio Supreme Court Says They Do!

“Just because you order boneless chicken wings at a restaurant does not mean you shouldn't expect to find bones….”

It’s a statement so absurd as to be laughable.

But it’s actually the summary in The Columbus Dispatch of a new 4-3 decision by the Ohio Supreme Court. And the absurdity of that one summary should scare the hell out of you.

And not just because you might choke on a chicken bone when you were told the chicken was boneless.

But because this same court will be making rulings in the future on women’s reproductive freedom and (if we pass it) new rules to end gerrymandering. Which means this is not a laughing matter at all.

[INVITATION: We are having a ZOOM event this evening (6:00 p.m.) to support the three Democratic candidates for the Ohio Supreme Court. Once you’re done reading this, please sign up top join our event HERE.]

Boneheaded Logic

Justice Deters—the old DeWine buddy appointed to Ohio’s highest court even though he lacked any judicial experience—confirmed that lack of experience when he tried to justify the nonsensical decision this way:

“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.”

OK. I’m a lawyer, but I don’t need to be to declare: that’s really stupid.

Deters goes on: “The food item’s label on the menu described a cooking style; it was not a guarantee.”

He further wrote: “There is no breach of a duty when the consumer could have reasonably expected and guarded against the presence of the injurious substance in the food.”

Joe!!!!! (I’ve known Joe a long time).

They said the chicken was boneless! Why in the heck would a consumer “reasonably expect[] and guard[] against the presence” of bones when they were told it was.…boneless?

And because of Joe’s conclusion that consumers should expect and protect against bones in chicken they are told are “boneless,” the 4-3 Court refused to allow a plaintiff who had sued (after two surgeries due to damage caused by a chicken bone from “boneless chicken”) to have his case go to a jury of his peers. That’s right, the man lost has case without having a jury hear the case at all.

Dissenting, Justice Mike Donnelly called Deter’s illogic "utter jabberwocky."

Then he explained the seriousness of the decision: “The result in this case is another nail in the coffin of the American jury system…In my view, the majority opinion makes a factual determination to ensure that a jury does not have a chance to apply something the majority opinion lacks − common sense."

Now Think About Reproductive Freedom…Or Gerrymandering

OK.

Why should all of you who don’t eat boneless chicken care about this?

Well, as Justice Donnelly wrote: “Could someone allergic to nuts or gluten sue if they were served something dangerous to them? ‘People can die under some of those circumstances, and this court would point to the decision in this case and say that lactose and gluten and nuts are natural to foods.’"

That’s bad enough.

What’s worse is that if four justices can interpret the term “boneless chicken” as including freaking bones(!) (in a way that favors insurance companies and the businesses they insure), I don’t want to even think about what the same court might do with:

• the new language of our Ohio Constitution that guarantees reproductive freedom—including for abortion care, fertility, miscarriage care, and the like

• the current language forbidding partisan gerrymandering

• the language we will pass this November to remove the politicians from the districting process entirely

We certainly know that these Justices’ partisan supporters (remember, the legislature intentionally made the Court partisan) will want them to reach conclusions that undermine both abortion access and fair districts. And if boneless can mean boneful, then anything goes.

Outrageous. And disturbing.

Want to do something about it?

Tonight, a great group will be hosting a virtual event to support our three Democratic candidates for the Ohio Supreme Court (two of whom dissented in this boneheaded decision).

I’ll be moderating the event.

YOU ARE INVITED!

It starts at 6:00 p.m. If you can make it, we’d love to have you.

Sign up HERE.

And please share this so others attend as well.