In an opinion last week, Judge Schofield granted summary judgment, in part, to the restaurant chain Boston Market in case “alleging that Defendants breached the implied warranty of merchantability when they served her a meal containing what she believes to be a baby chicken.”

The dispute boiled down to whether the item of food (depicted below) was a baby chicken, or instead a somewhat unusual looking chicken leg.

Boston Market submitted an expert report arguing that the item was, in fact, a chicken leg, but Judge Schofield concluded that there was a fact issue because, based on the photo, a “reasonable factfinder could conclude that the chicken is a baby chicken.”

Nonetheless, Judge Schofield granted summary judgment with respect to “Plaintiff’s requests for ’emotional distress,’ ‘pain and suffering’ and punitive damages” because those “types of damages generally are not available on a claim of breach of warranty of merchantability, which is a type of contract claim and the only surviving claim in this case.

That left damages of only what the plaintiff had paid for the meal—$11.63—and Judge Schofield suggested a practical way forward: “If Defendants are willing, they can tender complete relief to Plaintiff in the sum of $11.63 to resolve the action.”