NEW ORLEANS – Attorneys for fast food chain Rally’s Hamburgers want a lawsuit filed against it for a woman’s partial finger amputation heard in a Louisiana federal court.
Defendant Checkers Drive-In Restaurants Inc., doing business as Rally’s, filed its notice of removal last month to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
In its seven-page notice, Checkers wants the lawsuit, filed against it in February, moved from the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans.
Plaintiff Rebecca Wuorio filed her lawsuit against Checkers in the state court Feb. 18. She alleges that on Dec. 4, 2025, she fell from an “unstable bench” located in the outdoor seating area of the Rally’s in Marrero, Louisiana.
Wuorio claims that as she fell from the bench, she reached under a table to brace herself. In doing so, her finger was severed and resulted in a partial finger amputation.
In her lawsuit, she contends Rally’s and restaurant manager Dianne Raiford were negligent in failing to properly inspect, maintain, and repair the outdoor seating area, and failing to train others to inspect the area.
She seeks damages for past and future medical expenses, past and future physical pain and suffering, emotional distress, and physical disfigurement.
However, Checkers argues the lawsuit, because it's between citizens of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, shouldn’t have been filed in Louisiana court in the first place.
In its removal notice, the chain points to a 2000 Louisiana Supreme Court decision, affirming an award of $100,000 in general damages to a plaintiff who suffered a similar injury – a “traumatic amputation” of the left index finger.
Also, Checkers notes that Wuorio improperly seeks to join as a defendant Raiford, the restaurant manager.
The chain contends Raiford was “not personally involved” in the alleged incident.
“It is well settled that allegations of breach of managerial-duties like those contained in Plaintiff’s Petition do not state a viable cause of action against an employee-defendant for which he or she may be held personally liable,” Checkers wrote in its notice. “Applying Canter (v. Koehring Co.), the courts recognize that for an employee-defendant to be held liable he or she must have ‘breached an independent, personal duty’ owed to the individual plaintiff.”
The chain added, “In this matter, the allegations against Raiford amount to what sections of this Court have previously described as ‘a classic case of attempting to place liability upon an employee simply because of [her] general administrative responsibility for performance of some function of employment.’”
Simon Peragine Smith & Redfearn LLP in New Orleans is representing Checkers, and New Orleans firm Glago Williams LLC is representing Wuorio.
