Sarah Katz, 21, had a heart condition and was not aware of the drink’s caffeine content, which exceeded that of cans of Red Bull and Monster energy drinks combined, according to a legal filing

  • @Changetheview
    link
    171 year ago

    Absolutely. Legally speaking, the warnings/labeling are crucial. And they depend heavily on context. Using a common name like lemonade in a unique way puts the threshold even higher.

    Also legally speaking, people blaming the heart condition fail to understand US tort law. The responsibility falls to the provider, not the victim, even if they are unusually fragile (have a heart condition). This is the eggshell skull aka eggshell plaintiff doctrine, very well established in US law.

    And if you dive deep into the train of thought of what happens without it (companies blame everything on too fragile/frail of people), most people find it to be reasonable.

    The provider must make it safe for everyone OR place adequate protections/warnings that make it very clear who it’s not safe for. Seems like Panera failed on both accounts.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/eggshell_skull_rule

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If there’s a big sign that says “Plant-based, clean caffeine powered by guarana & green coffee extract” with “30 fl oz | 530 cal | 389 mg caffeine” on the sign she was staring at when she poured her drink, that might make things a bit complicated.

      The Panera signage seems obvious enough about caffeine that (assuming the signage was in place) I can’t imagine any more correct action Panera could have taken short of having a person stand there asking people if they have heart conditions.

      I mean, imitation crab meat often has trace lobster in it and nobody advertises that. It falls under “let our associates know if you have any dietary restrictions or food allergies”. Did she say “I can’t have caffeine” and then they let her fill her cup with charged lemonade? This is a beverage that is marketed on being caffeinated, and every piece of advertising, signage, etc features the caffeinated nature prominently because it’s a major selling point of it.

      Nobody should be blaming her. But unless this Panera did stuff very different from the Panera standard, it was sufficient.

      And you’re right about the legal implications of her medical condition. But I don’t see many people suggesting it’s her fault because she had a heart condition.