a) Does the ruling mean that Wendy's has breached its implied warranty of merchantability?
b) If a defendant has breached the implied warranty of merchantability does it mean the defendant has also been negligent?
c) How could Wendy's be in breach of its implied warranty when the meat it purchased was inspected continuously by state regulators and certified by the USDA?
d) Bone is not a foreign substance in meat; it is not something that was accidentally added during processing. How can it be in breach of the implied warranty of merchantability to serve a food in its natural state?
e) How will a jury decide what a reasonable consumer would expect to encounter in food?
f) This ruling creates a serious difficulty for Wendy's and its lawyer, in terms of arguing to the jury. What is that difficulty?