A complaint filed in the District of Massachusetts on Thursday claimed that Rose Acre Farms Inc. and Cracker Barrel Old Country Store Inc. are at fault for the illnesses the plaintiff received after eating eggs at a Cracker Barrel restaurant.
The filing purported that the defendants were negligent and allowed eggs to be served that were contaminated with salmonella; allegedly, this occurrence was only a part of a multistate salmonella outbreak. The plaintiff and her husband cited a Food and Drug Administration inspection, which found that the Rose Acre farm in Hyde County, North Carolina, was likely the source of the outbreak because the location had violated an “egg safety rule” by preparing and packaging eggs in conditions that were not sanitary.
The plaintiff “contracted a Salmonella illness and … suffered losses,” the complaint claimed, citing medical expenses, emotional distress, rehabilitation, and future disability. The plaintiff reportedly became sick the day after ordering the Sunrise Sampler at Cracker Barrel while on vacation. The plaintiff and her husband notified Cracker Barrel about the food poisoning within two weeks of their visit to the restaurant. The plaintiff’s condition reportedly worsened, leading to an emergency room visit, a seven-day stay in an intensive care unit, another stay in an Intermediary Coronary Care Unit, and a stay at a rehabilitation center.
While receiving medical care, the plaintiff reportedly received multiple diagnoses, and when she was ultimately discharged months later, she had to use a wheelchair or walker and receive home care. The plaintiff also had to be admitted to the hospital again and receive infusions. According to the complaint, the plaintiff was not able to walk on her own until about seven months after she ate at Cracker Barrel, and she could not drive until 14 months later.
Counts in the complaint included: strict liability based on the purported production defect and failure to warn, breach of implied warranties, negligence and negligent infliction of emotional distress, and loss of consortium. The plaintiffs asked the court for a judgment in their favor and relief from the court based on the alleged damages.
The plaintiff and her husband are represented by Honig & Barnes LLP.
