Question: A deputy sheriff drove his marked police cruiser through a Burger King drive-through in Vancouver, Washington. After ordering his hamburger, he decided to check his food. When he pulled into a nearby parking lot and lifted the bun, he found what looked like spit on the meat patty. DNA testing later confirmed that the substance was spit belonging to an employee at the Burger King. The deputy sheriff brought a product liability and negligence lawsuit against Burger King and its franchisee, alleging that he suffered emotional distress as a result of the incident, including vomiting and sleeplessness. Should contaminated food be the basis for such a lawsuit? Decide. Explain. See Bylsma v. Burger King (Wash. 293 P.3d 1168 2013).