A Tulsa, OK resident is the first to sue Daily Harvest over its contaminated “Frech Lentil + Leek Crumbles” product.

The first plaintiff is Carol Ann Ready, suing New York-based Daily Harvest in federal court for the Southern District of New York.

Daily Harvest has received approximately 470 reports of illness or adverse reactions to their products, specifically their “French Lentil + Leek Crumbles.”

In response to consumer reports of gastrointestinal illness and potential liver function issues, Daily Harvest has recalled all French Lentil + Leek Crumbles.

From April 28 to June 17, 2022, approximately 28,000 units of the recalled product were distributed to consumers in the United States through online sales and direct delivery, as well as through retail sales at the Daily Harvest store in Chicago and a so-called “pop-up” store in Los Angeles.

The Tulsa woman purchased the Daily Harvest product on May 3 and consumed it on May 7. Later the same day, she began experiencing abdominal pain and gastrointestinal discomfort. She also suffered from right shoulder pain.

The next day, she experienced more significant pain accompanied by nausea and headache. On May 9 her husband took her to the emergency room at St. John’s Ascension Medical Center.

At the Medical Center, she received pain medicine and had blood and urine tests along with ultrasound and CT scans. She was discharged with advice to pursue a bland diet.

She again purchased the “French Lentil + Leek Crumbles.” from Defendant on May 17 and had them for lunch on May 28. By 7 a.m. the next day, she was again experiencing abdominal and shoulder pain. The pain was so severe by the next that she again required hospitalization.

Her hospitalization lasted four days, and it found that she was experiencing liver and gallbladder dysfunction. After consulting with her primary care doctor, Ready underwent surgery to have her gallbladder removed on June 24, 2022.

“Plaintiff has sustained serious personal injuries; suffered, and will continue to suffer, significant pain and other physical discomfort; incurred, and will continue to incur, substantial medical expenses; have missed, and will likely miss in the future, work and time necessarily dedicated to advancement in her profession; and remains at risk for future health complications with damages far in excess of $75,000, the jurisdictional threshold of this court,” the lawsuit says.

The plaintiff charges the strict liability falls upon the defendants, adding that: “At all times relevant hereto, the Defendant was the manufacturer, packager, distributor and/or seller of the contaminated food product that was purchased and consumed by Plaintiff.”

In addition to the strict liability count, the plaintiff charges breach of warranty, negligence, and Negligence Per Se. It demands a jury trial.

Among the points plaintiff makes are these:

— The contaminated food product that the defendant manufactured, packaged, distributed, and/or sold was, at the time it left the defendant’s control, defective and unreasonably dangerous for its ordinary and expected use by the intended public, including plaintiff, because defendant’s product was contaminated by a substance injurious to human health.

— The contaminated food product that the defendant manufactured, packaged, distributed, and/or sold was delivered to the plaintiff without any change in its defective condition. The contaminated food product that the defendants manufactured, packaged, distributed, and/or sold was used by Plaintiff in the manner expected and intended.

Rochester, NY, attorney Paul V. Nunes, and nationally-known food safety attorney Bill Marler represent Ready in the civil action.

They conclude with this: “Plaintiff has suffered general, special, incidental, and consequential damages as the direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of defendant, in an amount that shall be fully proven at the time of trial. These damages include but are not limited to past and future pain and suffering, past and future damages for loss of enjoyment of life, past and future emotional distress, past and future medical and related expenses, including pharmaceutical expenses, travel and travel- related expenses, past and future lost wages, and all other ordinary, incidental, or consequential damages that would or could be reasonably anticipated to arise under the circumstances.”

The full complaint can be viewed here.

Editor’s note: Attorney Bill Marler is the publisher of Food Safety News.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News,click here)