Man burned by fajitas while praying can’t sue Applebee’s
WESTAMPTON, N.J. — A man who leaned over a plate of sizzling fajitas to pray can’t sue a Westampton restaurant because the dish burned him, an appellate court ruled Wednesday. Hiram Jimenez sought damages from Applebee’s Neighborhood Grill and Bar after a March 2010 incident at the chain’s restaurant on Burlington-Mount Holly Road. But an appellate panel said Applebee’s can’t be held responsible because the hot food posed an “open and obvious” danger. According to the ruling, Jimenez ordered fajitas that were placed in front of him in a “sizzling skillet.” When he bowed his head “close to the table,” the ruling says, Jimenez heard “a loud sizzling noise, followed by ‘a pop noise’ and then felt a burning sensation in his left eye and on his face.”…. In an incident report prepared for Appelebee’s, Jimenez said he was burned on his face, neck and arms after “grease popped” on the fajitas.
We live in a time and place in which we’e clearly lost our willingness to accept responsibility for ourselves and our actions. Tort law being what it is, it’s not surprising that Jimenez would sue Applebee’s for damages. After all, as he claimed, the server didn’t warn him the dish was hot. It was sizzling- a clear indication of significant heat- so you’d think a reasonable person would have cause to put two and two together…and come up with four. Your meal is set in front of you, it’s still sizzling, so to expect that a reasonably prudent person would proceed with all appropriate caution wouldn’t seem unreasonable.
Right??
Thankfully, the judge in this case threw out Jimenez’ lawsuit, saying the danger was “self-evident,” and that Applebee’s had no duty to warn Jimenez “against a danger that is open and obvious.” The judge felt a rational person would have noticed the sizzling plate and made a prudent decision to proceed with caution. I don’t know about you, but that seems a pretty reasonable and rational assessment to me.
Let me see if I have this straight: a server places a sizzling plate of food in front of Jimenez, who then closes his eyes to pray and bows his head over his meal. Jimenez than heard “a pop noise” and immediately after “felt a burning sensation in his left eye and on his face.” Jimenez contends he wasn’t warned that his meal was hot. In his mind, the “serious and permanent” damage he suffered in the incident were “solely as a result of (Applebee’s) negligence when he came in contact with a dangerous and hazardous condition, specifically, ‘a plate of hot food’.” SOLELY as a result? Should a reasonably prudent person not be expected to exercise a degree of common sense?
Of course businesses have a responsibility to discover and eliminate unsafe and/or dangerous conditions…but no business can account for every conceivable instance in which a customer might be put at risk. At some point, the individual has to accept some responsibility for their own safety and well-being. If no one tells you that a burner on a stove is hot and you put your hand on it, who’s responsible when you suffer a serious burn? Does the homeowner have a responsibility to warn you, or should we be able to assume you’re smart enough to understand that a burner might be hot?
At some point, society should be able to expect an individual to have enough on the ball to look out for themselves and not hold others to be solely responsible for their safety. We should also be able to expect our legal system to recognize when someone’s looking for a payday.
The moral of the story: That’s what you get for praying at Applebee’s.
