Five people were burned on and around their mouths after margaritas at a Chili’s restaurant in Forest City, North Carolina, were rimmed with a granulated substance that was mistaken for sugar, according to a health official. Three customers and two employees were affected, the official said.
The substance used on the drinks was a degreaser, a cleaning chemical, rather than the sugar that is typically used to coat a margarita glass. The mix-up caused chemical burns on the lips and skin around the mouth of those who drank the cocktails. The primary report on the incident was published by The New York Times, which described the burns as affecting people on and around their mouths after a granulated substance was mistaken for sugar.
NBC News reported that Chili’s customers in North Carolina suffered burns after sipping margaritas that had been mistakenly made with the cleaning chemical. ABC News, in a video report, described the episode as a margarita mix-up that left five people at the restaurant with burns, and framed it as a case involving customers and staff alike. The three outlets agree on the core facts: the number of people hurt, the location, and the confusion between a degreaser and sugar.
The incident has drawn attention to how cleaning products are stored and handled in restaurant kitchens and bars, where granulated substances can look similar to sugar or salt. Because the degreaser was on the rim of drinks served to the public, the case raises questions about how bar staff identify and separate chemicals from food ingredients during service. Health officials were involved in the response, and the official who spoke about the case described the exposure as affecting the mouth area of the affected people.
Chili’s is a national casual dining chain, and the Forest City location is one of its restaurants in western North Carolina. The source reports did not say whether any of the five people required hospital treatment, how long their injuries lasted, or whether any were permanently harmed, and those details were not available at the time of publication. Nor did the reports include a statement from the restaurant about the cause of the mix-up or any changes it has made since.
Readers should note that the reports on the case come from a limited number of outlets and that the core account rests on the health official’s description of the burns. Further details on the investigation, including how the chemical reached the bar area and what steps the restaurant or regulators have taken, may emerge in later coverage.