Judge Rules A Burrito Is Not A Sandwich

[matcom]

<snip>

A burrito is not a sandwich.

That's the culinary ruling of a Worcester judge, ending, for now, a food fight between Panera Bread Co. and Qdoba Mexican Grill.

In issuing his decision, which blocks Panera Bread's attempts to keep the burrito maker off its turf, Worcester Superior Court Judge Jeffrey A. Locke relied on testimony from Cambridge chef Chris Schlesinger and a former high-ranking USDA official, not to mention the Webster's Third New International Dictionary.

The burrito brouhaha began when Panera, one of the country's biggest bakery cafes, argued that owners of the White City Shopping Center in Shrewsbury violated a 2001 lease agreement that restricted the mall from renting to another sandwich shop. When the center signed a lease this year with Qdoba, Panera balked, saying the Mexican chain's burritos violate its sandwich exclusivity clause.

Not so, Qdoba countered, submitting affidavits from high-profile experts in the restaurant and food industry. "I know of no chef or culinary historian who would call a burrito a sandwich," Schlesinger said in his affidavit. "Indeed, the notion would be absurd to any credible chef or culinary historian."

In his ruling, Locke cited Webster's definition of a sandwich and explained that the difference comes down to two slices of bread versus one tortilla: "A sandwich is not commonly understood to include burritos, tacos, and quesadillas, which are typically made with a single tortilla and stuffed with a choice filling of meat, rice, and beans," he wrote.

Panera spokesman Mark Crowley declined to discuss the matter or say whether the St. Louis company planned to appeal the ruling. Mitchell Roberts , manager of the franchise group that runs the Shrewsbury Panera, could not be reached for comment yesterday.

"We were surprised at the suit because we think it's common sense that a burrito is not a sandwich," said Jeff Ackerman , owner of Qdoba franchise group, known as Chair 5 Restaurants, which plans to open the eatery next year. "We're just delighted that the experts and judge saw it the same way we did."

http://www.boston.com/business/globe/articles/2006/11/10/arguments_spread_thick?mode=PF

[kick-ass-bob]

1. Thank god that has been decided. Now we can move on

to the more important things like:

stool: chair, or ladder?

[xchrom]

2. how about spoonulas?

spoon or spatula?

[Hugin]

4. The Pita... Bread or a Pocket?

There's so much to be done!

[Deja Q]

3. Damn activist judges.

x(

Let people decide.

[petronius]

5. LOL!

:spray:

I guess the terrorists really did win on Tuesday, and this is the first evidence of it...

[Orsino]

8. Just preserving the traditional definition of sandwiches. n/t

[petronius]

6. It sounds as though Panera needs a new lawyer to review it's lease agreements

With the huge diversity of fast food types in malls these days, restricting their exclusive rights agreement to just "sandwich shops" was pretty stupid...

[Rabrrrrrr]

7. I'm still waiting for him to define a metope so the coal miners will go back to work.

:grr:

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

9. There's a Qdoba next to a Panera near me. No judges were required.

I suppose NJ is just more civilized. A land where sandwich and burrito can co-exist without litigation.

[LSdemocrat]

10. Yes,but what did the Founders think? I think sandwiches are in The Federalist somewhere

[BarenakedLady]

11. I can finally sleep at night

without the horror of burrito/sandwich nightmares.

Peace at last.:eyes: