FindLaw | Legal News & Information

Flies-in-Grits Charge Against Waffle House Will Proceed in Va.

A federal court has refused to dismiss an equal-rights lawsuit claiming the staff of a Virginia Waffle House restaurant discriminated against five minority customers when they were served grits laced with flies.

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia rejected Waffle House's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The restaurant chain had argued, among other things, that the lawsuit did not state a claim or prove damages under the federal law guaranteeing equal rights to all citizens, 42 U.S.C. § 1981.

The lawsuit names Northlake Foods Inc. and Waffle House Inc. as the defendants. Northlake is a franchisee of Waffle House Inc. and operates the Western Branch Waffle House in Chesapeake, Va., where the alleged prejudice occurred.

According to the suit, Amina Gilyard, her sister Kaamillah and three other friends — all of whom are black — were neither greeted nor offered seats when they entered the Waffle House restaurant in August 2003.

After bringing side dishes of waffles to the table, the waitress, who allegedly treated the five rudely, brought Amina Gilyard her plate of grits with large black flies allegedly cooked into it. The plaintiffs were appalled and informed the waitress, who took the plate back and said she would bring Gilyard another, the suit states.

The lawsuit says the plaintiffs found it impossible that the cook and the waitress would not have noticed the flies ahead of time and concluded the insects had been cooked into the grits on purpose.

The waitress allegedly would not assure the plaintiffs that their other orders would be safe and clean and did not indicate that the replacement grits would be taken from anyplace other than the same pot from which the infested grits had come. The five canceled their remaining orders and prepared to leave the restaurant.

But the waitress then yelled at the plaintiffs, saying they were "not going to walk out on this bill," according to the suit. The plaintiffs assured the waitress they would pay for the one glass of orange juice they had consumed, but the waitress ignored them and hurriedly tried to deliver their other orders, the complaint says.

The waitress then allegedly handed them a bill for $50 and called the police when they refused to pay. Police arrived and consulted with a magistrate before telling the plaintiffs they could leave without paying, the lawsuit says.

Northlake moved to dismiss the lawsuit, claiming the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

But the court found that the plaintiffs were entitled to file the suit because they met the minimum standards.

In response to Northlake's argument that the suit was flawed because the five had been provided services, the court found that those services are more expansive and "include Northlake's willingness to seat plaintiffs, to take their order and to fill it with edible food."

Northlake also argued in its motion for dismissal that the suit could not be taken at face value because the description of the grits is illogical. Northlake argued that in order for it to be true, the complaint would require Waffle House to have served "magic grits," which were infested when brought to some tables and not to others, or to have a "fly-pot" from which only certain orders were filled.

The court, noting it was compelled to view the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, accepted the plaintiffs' version of the meal.

Northlake had also argued that Amina Gilyard was the only party with standing, as she was served the grits.

But the court disagreed, saying the other plaintiffs were not "mere bystanders to the deprivation" of her rights and that established American restaurant culture provided for a particular kind of service.

This federal discrimination lawsuit is one of several Waffle House has faced. The company noted it has won two such suits.