Loading
Food and Beverage
7 min read
Areas of Expertise :
Food Safety, Microbiology, Infectious Diseases, Epidemiology, Food Service Industry, Restaurants, Public Health
Published Date:
Last Modified Date:
Jurisdiction:
Texas State
Pop Restaurants, LLC v. Anthony Mario Langione involved a foodborne illness lawsuit tied to a fried chicken sandwich purchased from a Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen restaurant operated by Pop Restaurants, LLC. Anthony Mario Langione became ill after eating part of the sandwich during a trip to Dallas, Texas. A stool culture later tested positive for Salmonella and Cryptosporidium, while his discharge summary also reported positive findings for Salmonella and Clostridium. His medical assessment included Salmonella enteritis. He sued Pop Restaurants under claims that included negligence, strict liability, res ipsa loquitur, and breach of express and implied warranties.
The central dispute was whether the chicken sandwich caused Langione's Salmonella infection. At trial, the court considered the condition of the chicken, food preparation and temperature-checking practices, Langione's symptoms and eating history, alternative sources of infection, and food safety expert testimony. The trial court entered judgment for Langione. The Texas Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed on November 26, 2024, and the Supreme Court of Texas denied review on September 5, 2025.
While traveling to Dallas for a concert, Langione stopped at a Popeyes restaurant operated by Pop Restaurants and ate about half of a fried chicken sandwich. After returning home, he developed sweating, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain, with symptoms continuing into the next day. A stool culture at Texas Health Hospital - Azle tested positive for Salmonella and Cryptosporidium, while his discharge summary also reported positive findings for Salmonella and Clostridium. His medical assessment identified Salmonella enteritis.
Langione filed suit in Dallas County, alleging that the chicken sandwich caused the illness that required medical treatment. His claims included negligence, strict liability, res ipsa loquitur, and breach of express and implied warranties. Medical billing records reflected $32,549.96 in expenses related to his treatment.
On July 11, 2022, Pop Restaurants served amended disclosures naming physician Cedric Wojciech Spak, MD, as a testifying expert. Langione challenged the designation as untimely, and the court struck it without prejudice to Pop Restaurants seeking permission for a late designation. On July 18, Pop Restaurants moved to exclude Langione's food safety expert, Catherine Adams Hutt, PhD, arguing that she was not qualified to offer medical causation opinions and had not adequately ruled out other possible sources of infection.
Langione maintained that Hutt was addressing the likely source of the Salmonella rather than diagnosing his medical condition. Her opinions concerned food safety, pathogen exposure, poultry preparation, and potential contamination sources.
On January 17, 2023, the trial court denied Pop Restaurants' motion to exclude Hutt, allowing her to testify. On January 30, Pop Restaurants moved for permission to designate Dr. Spak after the expert deadline, and the court considered that request at a February 20 hearing. On March 2, the court denied the motion. Dr. Spak did not testify at trial.
The bench trial began on March 14, 2023. Hutt testified about Salmonella, poultry cooking temperatures, and the condition of the chicken shown in a photograph taken by Langione. She testified that poultry should reach an internal temperature of 165 degrees for at least 15 seconds and concluded that part of the chicken in the photograph appeared undercooked.
Hutt also considered the timing of Langione's symptoms, his eating history, and other possible food sources. She concluded that the chicken sandwich was the most likely source of his Salmonella infection.
Regional manager Israel Hernandez testified about the restaurant's food preparation procedures. He stated that the location had never failed a safety inspection but acknowledged that cooked chicken was placed in a holding bin for immediate sale and that the internal temperature of filets in the bin was checked only every four hours.
During trial, Pop Restaurants objected to portions of Langione's medical records because the accompanying business-records affidavit had not been served on time. The court allowed Langione to supplement the disclosure and granted Pop Restaurants a 30-day continuance before the proceedings resumed. The bench trial concluded on April 21.
The court awarded Langione $32,549.96 in past medical expenses, $32,550 for past physical pain and suffering, $32,550 for past mental anguish, $21,646.86 in prejudgment interest, and $914.12 in costs. The judgment was signed on April 28, 2023.
Pop Restaurants appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the causation evidence, the exclusion of its late-designated medical expert, and the admission of Langione's medical records. The Texas Fifth Court of Appeals rejected those arguments and affirmed the trial court's judgment.
The appellate court held that a non-physician may offer causation testimony when the witness has specialized knowledge relevant to the specific issue. It found Hutt qualified based on her education and experience in food science and foodborne illness. The court also upheld the finding that the evidence established, to a reasonable medical probability, that the chicken sandwich caused Langione's Salmonella enteritis.
Pop Restaurants sought review from the Supreme Court of Texas following the appellate decision. The company filed its petition for review on April 24, 2025. Langione filed his response on July 30, and Pop Restaurants filed its reply on August 19. On September 5, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court denied the petition in case No. 25-0226. The Fifth Court of Appeals' judgment remained in place.
Court:
Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Case Name:
Pop Restaurants, LLC v. Anthony Mario Langione
Anthony Langione developed Salmonella enteritis after eating part of a fried chicken sandwich from a Popeyes restaurant.
The case centered on whether the chicken sandwich was the source of his Salmonella infection.
Evidence included medical findings, symptom timing, the condition of the chicken, restaurant practices, and food safety expert testimony.
The trial court found for Langione and awarded medical expenses, pain and suffering, mental anguish, interest, and costs.
The Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment, and the Texas Supreme Court denied review in 2025.
Salmonella
Foodborne Illness
Food Poisoning
Microbial Contamination
Sanitation
Health inspections
Causation Analysis
Pop Restaurants, LLC v. Anthony Mario Langione involved a foodborne illness lawsuit tied to a fried chicken sandwich purchased from a Popeyes Louisiana Kitchen restaurant operated by Pop Restaurants, LLC. Anthony Mario Langione became ill after eating part of the sandwich during a trip to Dallas, Texas. A stool culture later tested positive for Salmonella and Cryptosporidium, while his discharge summary also reported positive findings for Salmonella and Clostridium. His medical assessment included Salmonella enteritis. He sued Pop Restaurants under claims that included negligence, strict liability, res ipsa loquitur, and breach of express and implied warranties.
The central dispute was whether the chicken sandwich caused Langione's Salmonella infection. At trial, the court considered the condition of the chicken, food preparation and temperature-checking practices, Langione's symptoms and eating history, alternative sources of infection, and food safety expert testimony. The trial court entered judgment for Langione. The Texas Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed on November 26, 2024, and the Supreme Court of Texas denied review on September 5, 2025.
While traveling to Dallas for a concert, Langione stopped at a Popeyes restaurant operated by Pop Restaurants and ate about half of a fried chicken sandwich. After returning home, he developed sweating, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain, with symptoms continuing into the next day. A stool culture at Texas Health Hospital - Azle tested positive for Salmonella and Cryptosporidium, while his discharge summary also reported positive findings for Salmonella and Clostridium. His medical assessment identified Salmonella enteritis.
Langione filed suit in Dallas County, alleging that the chicken sandwich caused the illness that required medical treatment. His claims included negligence, strict liability, res ipsa loquitur, and breach of express and implied warranties. Medical billing records reflected $32,549.96 in expenses related to his treatment.
On July 11, 2022, Pop Restaurants served amended disclosures naming physician Cedric Wojciech Spak, MD, as a testifying expert. Langione challenged the designation as untimely, and the court struck it without prejudice to Pop Restaurants seeking permission for a late designation. On July 18, Pop Restaurants moved to exclude Langione's food safety expert, Catherine Adams Hutt, PhD, arguing that she was not qualified to offer medical causation opinions and had not adequately ruled out other possible sources of infection.
Langione maintained that Hutt was addressing the likely source of the Salmonella rather than diagnosing his medical condition. Her opinions concerned food safety, pathogen exposure, poultry preparation, and potential contamination sources.
On January 17, 2023, the trial court denied Pop Restaurants' motion to exclude Hutt, allowing her to testify. On January 30, Pop Restaurants moved for permission to designate Dr. Spak after the expert deadline, and the court considered that request at a February 20 hearing. On March 2, the court denied the motion. Dr. Spak did not testify at trial.
The bench trial began on March 14, 2023. Hutt testified about Salmonella, poultry cooking temperatures, and the condition of the chicken shown in a photograph taken by Langione. She testified that poultry should reach an internal temperature of 165 degrees for at least 15 seconds and concluded that part of the chicken in the photograph appeared undercooked.
Hutt also considered the timing of Langione's symptoms, his eating history, and other possible food sources. She concluded that the chicken sandwich was the most likely source of his Salmonella infection.
Regional manager Israel Hernandez testified about the restaurant's food preparation procedures. He stated that the location had never failed a safety inspection but acknowledged that cooked chicken was placed in a holding bin for immediate sale and that the internal temperature of filets in the bin was checked only every four hours.
During trial, Pop Restaurants objected to portions of Langione's medical records because the accompanying business-records affidavit had not been served on time. The court allowed Langione to supplement the disclosure and granted Pop Restaurants a 30-day continuance before the proceedings resumed. The bench trial concluded on April 21.
The court awarded Langione $32,549.96 in past medical expenses, $32,550 for past physical pain and suffering, $32,550 for past mental anguish, $21,646.86 in prejudgment interest, and $914.12 in costs. The judgment was signed on April 28, 2023.
Pop Restaurants appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the causation evidence, the exclusion of its late-designated medical expert, and the admission of Langione's medical records. The Texas Fifth Court of Appeals rejected those arguments and affirmed the trial court's judgment.
The appellate court held that a non-physician may offer causation testimony when the witness has specialized knowledge relevant to the specific issue. It found Hutt qualified based on her education and experience in food science and foodborne illness. The court also upheld the finding that the evidence established, to a reasonable medical probability, that the chicken sandwich caused Langione's Salmonella enteritis.
Pop Restaurants sought review from the Supreme Court of Texas following the appellate decision. The company filed its petition for review on April 24, 2025. Langione filed his response on July 30, and Pop Restaurants filed its reply on August 19. On September 5, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court denied the petition in case No. 25-0226. The Fifth Court of Appeals' judgment remained in place.
Food Safety Expert Witness
Catherine Adams Hutt, PhD, testified for Langione as a food safety expert. She addressed Salmonella exposure, poultry cooking temperatures, the appearance of the chicken, incubation timing, alternative food sources, and the likely source of Langione's infection.
Infectious Disease Expert Witness
Pop Restaurants attempted to designate Cedric Wojciech Spak, MD, an infectious disease physician, as a testifying expert, but the court excluded the late designation and he did not testify. In foodborne illness litigation, an infectious disease expert may address diagnosis, clinical symptoms, laboratory findings, treatment, and alternative medical causes.
Food Microbiology Expert Witness
A food microbiology expert may examine how pathogens such as Salmonella survive, spread, and contaminate food. The analysis may cover pathogen behavior, contamination routes, cooking conditions, and food-handling practices associated with bacterial exposure.
Restaurant Operations Expert Witness
A restaurant operations expert may assess cooking procedures, sanitation, employee protocols, food holding methods, and temperature monitoring. The analysis may compare day-to-day food preparation practices with restaurant procedures and applicable food safety requirements.
Multiple Forms of Evidence Supported the Causation Analysis
The causation analysis in Langione did not depend on a single piece of evidence. The trial court considered medical findings, symptom timing, a photograph of the chicken, Langione's eating history, restaurant preparation practices, possible alternative sources, and Hutt's food safety opinions when determining the likely source of the infection.
The Case Distinguished Medical Diagnosis From Pathogen Source
Langione's medical assessment identified Salmonella enteritis, while Hutt's testimony focused on where the Salmonella exposure most likely originated. This distinction became central to Pop Restaurants' challenge to her qualifications because the company argued that she was offering a medical causation opinion, while Langione maintained that her testimony concerned food safety and pathogen source identification.
Alternative Sources Were Considered in Evaluating Salmonella Exposure
Hutt considered Langione's eating history and other possible food sources before concluding that the chicken sandwich was the most likely source of the infection. The analysis included the timing of his symptoms and the circumstances surrounding other potential exposures.
Restaurant Practices Became Part of the Trial Record
The case included testimony about how the Popeyes location prepared and handled cooked chicken. Regional manager Israel Hernandez testified that the restaurant had never failed a safety inspection, but he also stated that cooked chicken was placed in a holding bin for immediate sale and that the internal temperature of filets in the bin was checked only every four hours.
Expert Disclosure Deadlines Affected the Evidence Presented at Trial
Pop Restaurants named Dr. Spak after the applicable expert deadline and later sought permission to designate him. The trial court denied that request, and he did not testify. The Fifth Court of Appeals later rejected Pop Restaurants' challenge to the trial court's handling of the late designation.
The trial court entered judgment for Langione after a bench trial focused on whether the Popeyes chicken sandwich caused his Salmonella enteritis. Pop Restaurants appealed the causation finding, the exclusion of its late-designated medical expert, and the admission of Langione's medical records. The Texas Fifth Court of Appeals rejected those challenges and affirmed the judgment on November 26, 2024.
Pop Restaurants then petitioned the Supreme Court of Texas for review. The court denied the petition on September 5, 2025, leaving the Fifth Court of Appeals' judgment in place.
What evidence supported the Salmonella causation finding?
The court considered Langione's medical findings, symptom timing, eating history, a photograph showing the condition of the chicken, restaurant preparation practices, alternative possible sources, and food safety expert testimony. The appellate court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court's causation finding.
What role did the food safety expert have in the case?
Catherine Adams Hutt evaluated the likely source of Langione's Salmonella exposure. Her testimony covered poultry cooking temperatures, the appearance of the chicken, incubation timing, alternative food sources, and the relationship between undercooked poultry and Salmonella.
Why did Pop Restaurants' infectious disease expert not testify?
Cedric Wojciech Spak, MD, did not testify because Pop Restaurants designated him after the expert deadline and the trial court denied permission for the late designation. The Fifth Court of Appeals later rejected Pop Restaurants' challenge to that ruling.
What happened after Langione ate the Popeyes chicken sandwich?
Langione became ill after eating about half of a fried chicken sandwich from a Popeyes restaurant operated by Pop Restaurants. He later experienced sweating, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain, and medical testing identified Salmonella along with other organisms. He subsequently sued Pop Restaurants, alleging that the chicken sandwich caused his Salmonella enteritis.
Food Safety Expert Witness
Catherine Adams Hutt, PhD, testified for Langione as a food safety expert. She addressed Salmonella exposure, poultry cooking temperatures, the appearance of the chicken, incubation timing, alternative food sources, and the likely source of Langione's infection.
Infectious Disease Expert Witness
Pop Restaurants attempted to designate Cedric Wojciech Spak, MD, an infectious disease physician, as a testifying expert, but the court excluded the late designation and he did not testify. In foodborne illness litigation, an infectious disease expert may address diagnosis, clinical symptoms, laboratory findings, treatment, and alternative medical causes.
Food Microbiology Expert Witness
A food microbiology expert may examine how pathogens such as Salmonella survive, spread, and contaminate food. The analysis may cover pathogen behavior, contamination routes, cooking conditions, and food-handling practices associated with bacterial exposure.
Restaurant Operations Expert Witness
A restaurant operations expert may assess cooking procedures, sanitation, employee protocols, food holding methods, and temperature monitoring. The analysis may compare day-to-day food preparation practices with restaurant procedures and applicable food safety requirements.
Multiple Forms of Evidence Supported the Causation Analysis
The causation analysis in Langione did not depend on a single piece of evidence. The trial court considered medical findings, symptom timing, a photograph of the chicken, Langione's eating history, restaurant preparation practices, possible alternative sources, and Hutt's food safety opinions when determining the likely source of the infection.
The Case Distinguished Medical Diagnosis From Pathogen Source
Langione's medical assessment identified Salmonella enteritis, while Hutt's testimony focused on where the Salmonella exposure most likely originated. This distinction became central to Pop Restaurants' challenge to her qualifications because the company argued that she was offering a medical causation opinion, while Langione maintained that her testimony concerned food safety and pathogen source identification.
Alternative Sources Were Considered in Evaluating Salmonella Exposure
Hutt considered Langione's eating history and other possible food sources before concluding that the chicken sandwich was the most likely source of the infection. The analysis included the timing of his symptoms and the circumstances surrounding other potential exposures.
Restaurant Practices Became Part of the Trial Record
The case included testimony about how the Popeyes location prepared and handled cooked chicken. Regional manager Israel Hernandez testified that the restaurant had never failed a safety inspection, but he also stated that cooked chicken was placed in a holding bin for immediate sale and that the internal temperature of filets in the bin was checked only every four hours.
Expert Disclosure Deadlines Affected the Evidence Presented at Trial
Pop Restaurants named Dr. Spak after the applicable expert deadline and later sought permission to designate him. The trial court denied that request, and he did not testify. The Fifth Court of Appeals later rejected Pop Restaurants' challenge to the trial court's handling of the late designation.
The trial court entered judgment for Langione after a bench trial focused on whether the Popeyes chicken sandwich caused his Salmonella enteritis. Pop Restaurants appealed the causation finding, the exclusion of its late-designated medical expert, and the admission of Langione's medical records. The Texas Fifth Court of Appeals rejected those challenges and affirmed the judgment on November 26, 2024.
Pop Restaurants then petitioned the Supreme Court of Texas for review. The court denied the petition on September 5, 2025, leaving the Fifth Court of Appeals' judgment in place.
What evidence supported the Salmonella causation finding?
The court considered Langione's medical findings, symptom timing, eating history, a photograph showing the condition of the chicken, restaurant preparation practices, alternative possible sources, and food safety expert testimony. The appellate court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court's causation finding.
What role did the food safety expert have in the case?
Catherine Adams Hutt evaluated the likely source of Langione's Salmonella exposure. Her testimony covered poultry cooking temperatures, the appearance of the chicken, incubation timing, alternative food sources, and the relationship between undercooked poultry and Salmonella.
Why did Pop Restaurants' infectious disease expert not testify?
Cedric Wojciech Spak, MD, did not testify because Pop Restaurants designated him after the expert deadline and the trial court denied permission for the late designation. The Fifth Court of Appeals later rejected Pop Restaurants' challenge to that ruling.
What happened after Langione ate the Popeyes chicken sandwich?
Langione became ill after eating about half of a fried chicken sandwich from a Popeyes restaurant operated by Pop Restaurants. He later experienced sweating, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain, and medical testing identified Salmonella along with other organisms. He subsequently sued Pop Restaurants, alleging that the chicken sandwich caused his Salmonella enteritis.
Salmonella
Foodborne Illness
Food Poisoning
Microbial Contamination
Sanitation
Health inspections
Causation Analysis
Wage And Hour Disputes, +4
Food and Beverage
Food And Beverage, +4
Food and Beverage
Food Safety, +3
Food and Beverage