Two Popeyes customers in Texas are suing the fast-food chain and its parent company for $1.5 million after allegedly finding a condom-like object inside a piece of fried chicken.

Justin Howard and Danielle McKinnon of Texas filed a lawsuit against Popeyes and parent company Restaurant Brands International on Aug. 3 after allegedly finding a condom-like object inside a chicken order from the fast-food chain in Houston, Texas, in late July.

“The discovery instantly transformed what should have been an ordinary family meal into a deeply disturbing and frightening event,” Harris County District Court documents obtained by USA TODAY state.

The two are suing the companies for various degrees of negligence and violating the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA). The DTPA protects consumers in Texas from false, misleading or deceptive business practices.

“We looked at extensive internal video and determined this was likely a restaurant glove that fell into the batter,” Popeyes told USA TODAY via email on Aug. 12. “Regardless, it’s not acceptable, so we issued a refund and an apology to the guest. This does not reflect the excellent experience that we strive to deliver at Popeyes.”

The plaintiff’s legal counsel did not respond immediately when contacted by USA TODAY on Aug. 12.

What happened at the Houston Popeyes?

On or around July 25, Howard and McKinnon purchased fried chicken from the Popeyes at 7416 S. Sam Houston Parkway West in Houston, according to the plaintiff’s petition for a jury trial, which USA TODAY obtained.

Upon taking a bite of chicken, Howard “immediately discovered what appeared to be a condom-like foreign object embedded within the chicken itself,” the petition states. The plaintiffs stopped eating and became nauseated, the court document continues.

After discovering the object, Howard and McKinnon returned to the restaurant. According to the petition, restaurant management attempted to replace the contaminated chicken but only “after persistence” were the plaintiffs refunded.

“This conscious indifference exemplifies that customer safety was secondary to minimizing the incident,” the petition reads.

Howard and McKinnon fear exposure to infectious contaminants, bacteria, viruses, bloodborne pathogens, bodily fluids, sexually transmitted diseases or other hazardous substances, the petition continues.

“No customer should ever be faced with these fears,” the court document says.

Greta Cross is a national trending reporter at USA TODAY. Story idea? Email her at gcross@usatoday.com.