The Boneless Chicken Lawsuit and What It Means for Your Meals

In July 2024, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in the case of Berkheimer v. REB Investments that the term "boneless" regarding chicken wings refers to a cooking style rather than a literal guarantee of the absence of bones. Consequently, consumers must exercise caution, as bones are considered a natural part of poultry that a diner should reasonably expect.

The Landmark Case: Berkheimer v. REB Investments

The legal controversy began in 2016 when Michael Berkheimer was dining at a Wings on Brookwood restaurant in Hamilton, Ohio. Berkheimer ordered "boneless wings" with parmesan garlic sauce. While eating, he felt a piece of meat go down the wrong way. Days later, after developing a fever and being unable to keep food down, a doctor discovered a thin, 1 3/8-inch chicken bone wedged in his esophagus. The bone caused a tear that led to a massive infection and permanent medical complications.

Berkheimer sued the restaurant, its chicken supplier, and the farm that produced the chicken, alleging negligence and a failure to warn consumers that "boneless wings" could contain bones. The case eventually reached the Ohio Supreme Court, which was tasked with deciding a fundamental question: Is a "boneless" label a promise of safety, or is it merely a marketing term for a specific type of product?

In a 4-3 decision, the court sided with the restaurant. Justice Joseph T. Deters, writing for the majority, argued that "boneless wings" are a well-known culinary category. The court found that because a bone is a natural part of a chicken, its presence in a chicken-based dish—even one labeled "boneless"—is not a "foreign" object. The ruling established that a reasonable consumer should guard against the possibility of a bone in a meat product.

The Legal Definition: Cooking Style vs. Literal Guarantee

The 2024 ruling significantly shifted the legal landscape regarding food labeling. The court's distinction between a "cooking style" and a "guarantee" is the crux of why this case matters to your meals today in 2026.

When a restaurant advertises "boneless wings," they are technically selling you nuggets of chicken breast meat prepared in the style of a chicken wing (usually breaded and tossed in sauce). The court compared "boneless wings" to "chicken fingers," noting that no one expects a chicken to actually have fingers. Similarly, the court referenced other common food items:

• Pitted Olives: May still contain a pit or a fragment of one.
• Seeded Grapes: Occasionally contain a seed.
• Cherry Pie: May contain a cherry pit.

Under this legal framework, the word "boneless" is treated as an adjective describing the form of the meat (meat removed from the bone) rather than a strict warranty of 100% bone-free content. This means that from a liability standpoint, the burden of safety has shifted partially from the producer to the consumer. In 2026, this precedent continues to protect restaurants from lawsuits arising from "natural" food components, provided those components are not unexpected for the type of meat being served.

The Foreign-Natural Doctrine vs. Reasonable Expectations

To understand why the court ruled this way, we must look at the two primary legal tests used in food liability cases: the Foreign-Natural Doctrine and the Reasonable Expectation Test.

The Foreign-Natural Doctrine

This is an older legal standard that focuses on whether the object that caused the injury is "natural" to the food or "foreign" to it.

• Natural: Bones in chicken, pits in fruit, shells in nuts.
• Foreign: Glass, metal shards, plastic, or insects.

Under the strict Foreign-Natural Doctrine, if you are injured by something natural to the food, the restaurant is generally not liable. If you are injured by something foreign, they are. In the Berkheimer case, the bone was deemed natural to the chicken, which heavily influenced the majority's decision.

The Reasonable Expectation Test

The dissenting justices in the Ohio Supreme Court argued for the Reasonable Expectation Test. This test asks: "Would a reasonable consumer expect to find this object in this specific dish?"

Justice Maureen O’Connor, in her dissent, argued that when a menu explicitly labels something as "boneless," a reasonable person would expect it to be free of bones. She noted that the "cooking style" argument is a linguistic technicality that ignores the plain meaning of the word "boneless." However, the majority ruled that even with the label, the "naturalness" of the bone means the consumer must still be on the lookout.

Why 100% Bone-Free Chicken is Technically Challenging

As we navigate the food market in 2026, it is important to understand the industrial reality of poultry processing. While technology has advanced, achieving a 100% bone-free rate in mass-produced chicken is nearly impossible.

"Boneless wings" are typically made from breast meat that has been mechanically or manually deboned. In large-scale processing plants, thousands of chickens are processed every hour. While X-ray machines and sensory scanners are used to detect bone fragments, they are not infallible.

• X-Ray Sensitivity: Most commercial X-ray systems can detect bone fragments down to a certain size (usually 2mm or larger), but smaller, thinner, or less calcified bones (like those found in younger chickens) may pass through undetected.
• Mechanical Stress: During the high-speed stripping of meat from the carcass, small splinters of bone can occasionally be sheared off and embedded in the breast meat.
• Manual Oversight: Even with human inspectors, the sheer volume of meat makes it statistically certain that a small percentage of "boneless" products will contain fragments.

Because the poultry industry cannot guarantee 100% removal, the legal ruling acts as a safety valve for the food supply chain, preventing an endless wave of litigation for a problem that is technically unavoidable at current production scales.

How Restaurants Have Adapted Their Menus in 2026

Since the ruling, the dining experience has subtly changed. If you look closely at menus in 2026, you will notice that many national chains and local eateries have updated their language to mitigate risk.

Many menus now include small-print disclaimers at the bottom of the page or near poultry sections. These disclaimers often read: "Our boneless items are processed to remove bones; however, an occasional bone or fragment may remain." This specific phrasing is designed to satisfy the "duty to warn" that the Ohio Supreme Court discussed. By providing this warning, restaurants further insulate themselves from liability because the consumer has been explicitly told that the "boneless" label is not absolute.

Furthermore, some establishments have moved away from the word "boneless" entirely, opting for terms like:

• Chicken Bites
• Wingless Tenders
• Saucy Nuggets
• Boneless-Style Wings

These naming conventions help clarify that the product is a processed meat item rather than a literal wing that has been meticulously hand-deboned.

Practical Safety Tips for Consumers

Given that the law now firmly places the "duty of care" on the diner, it is essential to approach "boneless" meals with a level of awareness. Here are practical steps for your meals in 2026:

1. Do Not Assume Total Safety: Treat "boneless" chicken as you would a fish fillet. While the bones should be gone, always chew carefully, especially when feeding young children or the elderly.
2. Cut Before Consuming: For children, it is highly recommended to cut boneless wings or nuggets into smaller pieces rather than letting them bite into a whole piece. This allows for a visual and tactile check for fragments.
3. Be Aware of "Tender" vs. "Boneless": Tenders are usually whole muscle strips (the pectoralis minor), while some boneless wings are formed from chopped and shaped meat. Formed meat generally has a lower risk of large bone fragments compared to whole-muscle "boneless" cuts.
4. Know the Risk of Different Meats: The Ohio ruling doesn't just apply to chicken. The same logic applies to "boneless" pork ribs, "pitted" cherries, and "filet" of fish. Always assume the natural component (bone, pit, or scale) could be present.

Comparing Food Liability: When Can You Actually Sue?

While the Berkheimer case makes it harder to sue for a bone in chicken, it does not give restaurants a "get out of jail free" card for all food-related injuries. There are still clear boundaries where a restaurant remains liable for your safety.

The distinction remains the "naturalness" of the object. If you find a piece of a plastic glove in your chicken, the Berkheimer ruling does not protect the restaurant, as plastic is not a natural component of a chicken.

FAQs: The Boneless Chicken Lawsuit

Does this ruling apply to all states?

While the Berkheimer v. REB Investments ruling was issued by the Ohio Supreme Court and is only legally binding in Ohio, it serves as a highly influential "persuasive authority" for courts in other states. Many states already follow similar "reasonable expectation" or "foreign-natural" rules. If you live outside Ohio, your local courts may use this case as a precedent to dismiss similar lawsuits.

Can I still sue if a bone causes a severe injury?

You can always file a lawsuit, but winning has become significantly more difficult. To succeed in 2026, a plaintiff would likely need to prove that the bone was not "natural" (which is nearly impossible for chicken) or that the restaurant’s preparation was so negligent that it exceeded "reasonable" risk—for example, if a large portion of a carcass was left in the meat.

Are "boneless wings" just chicken nuggets?

Technically, yes. Most "boneless wings" are made from chicken breast meat that is breaded and fried. Unlike traditional wings, which consist of skin, bone, and cartilage, boneless wings are essentially a marketing term for high-quality nuggets or tenders tossed in wing sauce.

Does this mean companies don't have to try to remove bones anymore?

No. Food safety regulations enforced by the USDA and FDA still require companies to follow "Good Manufacturing Practices" (GMPs). While a single bone might not lead to a successful private lawsuit, a high frequency of bones in a product line could trigger a regulatory audit or a product recall if it is deemed a systemic safety hazard.

How common are bone fragments in boneless chicken?

Industry data suggests that bone fragments are found in approximately 0.5% to 1% of processed boneless poultry products. While this seems low, considering the billions of pounds of chicken consumed annually, it means millions of "boneless" servings contain small fragments every year.

Moving Forward: The Future of Consumer Protection

The "boneless chicken lawsuit" serves as a reminder that legal language and culinary marketing do not always align with literal reality. As we move through 2026, the takeaway for consumers is a return to "caveat emptor"—let the buyer beware.

While we expect the food we buy to be safe, the law increasingly recognizes the inherent risks of processing natural products. This ruling doesn't mean food safety standards are slipping; rather, it clarifies that "boneless" is an aspiration and a style, not a physical impossibility of nature. For your next meal, enjoy the convenience of boneless options, but keep in mind that the responsibility for that final "safety check" before you swallow now rests firmly on your plate.