Massachusetts Court Declares Burritos Not Sandwiches [Archive]

thedude110

Nov 13, 2006, 07:09 PM

So, Panera Bread went to court to to argue for a broader definition of "sandwich", seeking to add quesadillas, burritos and tacos to the sandwich family.

Well, Massachusetts wasn't going to have any of that.

And why does Panera bread care? Well, if they can corner the quesadilla market, they can close down competition, apparently.

Link.
(http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061110/ap_on_re_us/burrito_or_sandwich)

aquajet

Nov 13, 2006, 07:23 PM

A tortilla is a tortilla. Sheesh. :rolleyes:

WildCowboy

Nov 13, 2006, 07:25 PM

Duh...my dictionary says that one of the characteristics of a sandwich is two pieces of bread. (Apparently anything more than that would be a Dagwood.)

skunk

Nov 13, 2006, 07:27 PM

Duh...my dictionary says that one of the characteristics of a sandwich is two pieces of bread. (Apparently anything more than that would be a Dagwood.)Anything more than that would be gluttony.

WildCowboy

Nov 13, 2006, 07:29 PM

Anything more than that would be gluttony.

Hey...I occasionally go for the three-bread-slice sandwich, particularly when there are only three slices left in the bag and two of them are heels. Does that make me a heel?

skunk

Nov 13, 2006, 07:30 PM

Hey...I occasionally go for the three-bread-slice sandwich, particularly when there are only three slices left in the bag and two of them are heels. Does that make me a heel?A double heel, I'd say.

thedude110

Nov 13, 2006, 07:31 PM

The court's ruling seems to seriously jeapordize the open-faced sandwich. Without the second piece of bread, does the open-faced sandwich face a difficult transition from sandwich sub-genre to kingdom of its own?

http://pic12.picturetrail.com/VOL417/1032367/7628379/135930330.jpg

aquajet

Nov 13, 2006, 07:31 PM

I wonder where open sandwiches fall in this mess.

Apparently, somewhere ahead of me.

nbs2

Nov 13, 2006, 09:35 PM

It was a long shot, but clearly worth pursuing. Mall traffic for food tends to be rather profitable, with shoppers and all (especially in the winter when trips outside are kept to a minimum). If they could have convinced the judge to rule in their favor, that would have minimized competition. Additionally, it is always good business to get maximum clarity from a court regarding the interpretation of a contract - since that would be in the interest of both Panera and the mall.

MacNut

Nov 14, 2006, 01:27 AM

Qdoba, owned by San Diego-based Jack in the Box Inc., called food experts to testify on its behalf.

Among them was Cambridge chef Chris Schlesinger, who said in an affidavit: "I know of no chef or culinary historian who would call a burrito a sandwich. Indeed, the notion would be absurd to any credible chef or culinary historian."so this is were court cases are headed?:eek:

Ok i want to know if there is a food court in this mall and if Mc Donald's is there since they sell a McChicken isn't that a sandwich?

BengalDuck

Nov 14, 2006, 01:40 AM

Ahh... I love how tax dollars are spent!

(And for the record - Sandwiches can have 1 piece of bread, like the open face. But it must be a hoagie-type piece instead of a regular old sliced bread. They can be slices of bread, like the club as well.)

MacNut

Nov 14, 2006, 01:43 AM

BengalDuck

Nov 14, 2006, 01:57 AM

Absolutely! It's still bread... I've always eaten the crust but as long as theres bread there it's good.

How many posts until my title reads "Sandwich Judge of MA"?

fotografica

Nov 14, 2006, 05:39 AM

Abstract

Nov 14, 2006, 06:45 AM

They needed experts and chefs and agriculural officials to convince the judge and others that a burrito isn't a sandwich?

There really should be a law of common sense so that people's time isn't wasted.

I wonder where open sandwiches fall in this mess.

Apparently, somewhere ahead of me.

But then a pizza would count as a sandwich. Where will the madness end!

ozontheroad

Nov 14, 2006, 06:53 AM

they could start by demonstrating that Burritos are considered sandwiches in Mexico

but they are not... I spent 4 months in Mexico last year and sandwiches are called "tortas" and Burritos are ....well.... burritos

nbs2

Nov 14, 2006, 08:43 AM

Let's what we have going on in this state right now...Our infrastructure is literally crumbling around us (read Big Dig,lol),people are leaving the state in droves,the state's economy is lagging,RE prices are still insanely overpriced,we have a governor that's hardly in the state anymore,the welfare system is abused left and right (don't even get me started on that,lol) and all the courts can spend time on is deciding the correct terminology for a sandwich???Ahh gotta love this state :D :D

Yes. But, people still have contract disputes. The courts don't exist solely to resolve major questions. The courts don't have the power to tell the Gov to stay in MA or the legislature to fix the welfare system (at least, based on the failure you describe).

They needed experts and chefs and agriculural officials to convince the judge and others that a burrito isn't a sandwich?

There really should be a law of common sense so that people's time isn't wasted.

I don't think the judge was that well versed in the food industry. When interpreting a contract, the factfinder should be aware of common use in the industry. When I say I will buy 10 chickens from you, does that mean 10 fryers, boilers, or a mix? You need experts to make the court aware. Same with the burrito/sandwich. What if contrary to common sense, food experts grouped the two in the same class of "filling contained within a grain product"? This is especially distressing as "wraps" are becoming a popular low-carb alternative to traditional bread.

Can anybody here provide a satisfactory distinction between a cheesesteak wrap, a cheesesteak, and a beef and cheese burrito (other than the first is really a Swiss-topped freak of nature)?

imacintel

Nov 14, 2006, 09:17 AM

Is the Philly Melt I had Denny's considered a sandwhich?

iGary

Nov 14, 2006, 09:21 AM

Kind of off-tangent, but Chipotle (a burrito place) wanted to open a store in our downtown area here and the city wouldn't let them because they serve with plastic forks. :rolleyes:

Abstract

Nov 14, 2006, 09:22 AM

What if contrary to common sense, food experts grouped the two in the same class of "filling contained within a grain product"? This is especially distressing as "wraps" are becoming a popular low-carb alternative to traditional bread.

Well the mall's food experts didn't sign that agreement and probably signed something they interpreted as completely different. Even if it was true in the culinary world, the people who signed it thought a sandwich was what most people interpret as a sandwich. I think that part of the contract would never hold up in court anyway. Hit me if I ever call a pizza a "sandwich".

nbs2

Nov 14, 2006, 10:29 AM

Well the mall's food experts didn't sign that agreement and probably signed something they interpreted as completely different. Even if it was true in the culinary world, the people who signed it thought a sandwich was what most people interpret as a sandwich. I think that part of the contract would never hold up in court anyway. Hit me if I ever call a pizza a "sandwich".

What would the mall have signed? Or, if I understand you correctly, are you saying that the mall's food experts were not the signers - it was the mall's administration, who would not be viewed as understanding a broader interpretation? I would view that failure against the mall - they are savvy enough to have understood the need to define terms. Their attorneys should have known to define the terms explicitly (although, here the fault rests with the Panera attorneys who did not define sandwich well enough) and avoid having to rely on a culinary definition.

Can I ask why you think that the clause wouldn't hold up in court?

tobefirst

Nov 14, 2006, 11:00 AM

Why can't they get along? These are two of my favorite not-quite fast food places! (:

yg17

Nov 14, 2006, 12:12 PM

In court papers, Panera, a St. Louis-based chain of more than 900 cafes, argued for a broad definition of a sandwich, saying that a flour tortilla is bread and that a food product with bread and a filling is a sandwich.

First we're the home of the highest crime rate in the US. Now we're the home of some idiots who think a burrito is a sandwich. I think the media just wants STL to look bad after our world series brought in the lowest ratings in history :D

And it's St. Louis Bread Company, not Panera dammit!

savar

Nov 14, 2006, 12:22 PM

Anything more than that would be gluttony.

No Jewish deli's in Surrey?

I love double-deckers.

IJ Reilly

Nov 14, 2006, 12:29 PM

Ok i want to know if there is a food court in this mall and if Mc Donald's is there since they sell a McChicken isn't that a sandwich?

I think this case has already been to Food Court. If the sandwich shop doesn't agree with the ruling, I believe the next step would be to the Court of Unappealing.

Squonk

Nov 14, 2006, 12:43 PM

And it's St. Louis Bread Company, not Panera dammit!

From wikipedia(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panera_Bread)

In 1993, Au Bon Pain Co. purchased the Saint Louis Bread Company and renovated the 20 bakery-cafés in the St. Louis area.

In May 1999, in order to expand Panera Bread into a national chain, Au Bon Pain Co. divested itself of all other chains (including Au Bon Pain, which is now owned by Compass Group North America[1]). Au Bon Pain Co. then renamed itself Panera Bread Company. The Panera Bread Company now operates or franchises over 1,000 Panera Bread bakery-cafés in 36 states and 17 manufacturing plants to support the bakery-cafés.

In the St. Louis area, the stores themselves are still branded as The St. Louis Bread Company. However, they serve a full Panera menu, and most in-store signs, cups, and even napkins are branded as "Panera Bread." This "dual branding" can cause confusion and arguments over which is the chain's proper name.

:D :D :D

yg17

Nov 14, 2006, 12:55 PM

From wikipedia(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panera_Bread)

:D :D :D

I was born with it being St. Louis Bread Co, I will die with it being St. Louis Bread Co :D

aquajet

Nov 14, 2006, 01:18 PM

But then a pizza would count as a sandwich. Where will the madness end!

I don't know, but I'll call my friend Reuben. He's one of those food industry experts.

IJ Reilly

Nov 14, 2006, 01:21 PM

With this legal dispute over whether a burrito is a sandwich, it's kind of interesting to note that burritos, at least as Americans know them, are essentially an American invention. I suppose you could say burritos are to Mexican food what chop suey and chow mein are to Chinese food.

IJ Reilly

Nov 14, 2006, 01:22 PM

I don't know, but I'll call my friend Reuben. He's one of those food industry experts.

Did they name the Reuben sandwich after him?

thedude110

Nov 14, 2006, 04:09 PM

You need experts to make the court aware. Same with the burrito/sandwich. What if contrary to common sense, food experts grouped the two in the same class of "filling contained within a grain product"? This is especially distressing as "wraps" are becoming a popular low-carb alternative to traditional bread.

mmm ... but according to the article, this testimony from an "expert witnesss":

Qdoba, owned by San Diego-based Jack in the Box Inc., called food experts to testify on its behalf.

Among them was Cambridge chef Chris Schlesinger, who said in an affidavit: "I know of no chef or culinary historian who would call a burrito a sandwich. Indeed, the notion would be absurd to any credible chef or culinary historian."

:confused:

b0tt094

Nov 14, 2006, 04:53 PM

man what a culture we have... its kinda embarrassing

nbs2

Nov 14, 2006, 05:08 PM

mmm ... but according to the article, this testimony from an "expert witnesss" <snip>

Keep in mind that the expert that Qdoba brought in asserted that the burrito is the furthest thing from a sandwich. I would imagine that there are some experts who would comment that the "grain wrapped filling" is enough for a sandwich, or some other similar point. Those are the ones that St. Louis brought in. I just expect that since they lost, any pithy comments from their experts just didn't make it.

Also, what about a crunchy taco where the shell breaks at the hinge - is that a sandwich?

question fear

Nov 14, 2006, 07:14 PM

I used to work for Panera bread, and if the one in the lawsuit is the one I am thinking of, my Panera is part of that franchise.
I laughed and laughed all day.
I have nothing really substantive to add here. Except to fuel the "It's Panera, not ST Louis Bread Co" fire, because all my corporate training drilled into our heads that outside St Louis it was Panera Bread, no question.

aquajet

Nov 14, 2006, 07:17 PM

nbs, I think the matter of deciding whether or not a burrito is a sandwich is one that is easily answered by common sense. I challenge you to find any food establishment with a menu that includes burritos under a sandwich heading. Not to mention we can also answer the question by picking up a dictionary. I suppose one could find a food industry expert to testify that a burrito is indeed a sandwich, but I think we all know that's pretty mendacious. The reason for this is purely to establish a monopoly. A burrito isn't a sandwich, and they know it.

As a side note, it is kind of ironic that we can find burritos in a Mexican restaurant.

aquajet

Nov 14, 2006, 07:19 PM

Did they name the Reuben sandwich after him?

Nah, his mother was eating a Reuben sandwich when she went into labor. He's named after the sandwich. ;)

IJ Reilly

Nov 14, 2006, 07:23 PM

Nah, his mother was eating a Reuben sandwich when she went into labor. He's named after the sandwich. ;)

I don't even want to know if this story is true. Even if it isn't it ought to be.

thewhitehart

Nov 14, 2006, 07:51 PM

Duh...my dictionary says that one of the characteristics of a sandwich is two pieces of bread. (Apparently anything more than that would be a Dagwood.)

On an unrelated subject, Blondie's current artist, the son of the original creator, is making a Dagwood sandwich shop chain! It's starting in Florida and spreading, can't wait!

skunk

Nov 14, 2006, 09:23 PM

I think we should refer this question to the good Earl.

dornoforpyros

Nov 14, 2006, 10:08 PM

oh no! Some one needs to inform Sam! (http://www.shawarmastation.ca/) He makes a delicious vegetarian item called a Sam Sandwich, it's amazing...mmm I go there at least once every week or 2, even though it's very much out of my way.

If your every in Calgary I HIGHLY recommend it :)

but I digress, it's in a pita! and not on bread!

MacNut

Nov 15, 2006, 12:17 AM

oh no! Some one needs to inform Sam! (http://www.shawarmastation.ca/) He makes a delicious vegetarian item called a Sam Sandwich, why not call it a Samwich.

MacNut

Nov 15, 2006, 12:21 AM

I think we should refer this question to the good Earl.The sandwich was named after 4th Earl of Sandwich, an 18th-century English aristocrat, although it is unlikely to have been invented by him. Indeed a form of sandwich is attributed to the ancient Jewish sage Hillel the Elder, who is said to have put meat from the Paschal lamb and bitter herbs inside matzo (or flat bread) during Passover.
It is said that Lord Sandwich was fond of this form of food because it allowed him to continue playing cards at cribbage while eating without getting his cards sticky, from eating meat with his bare hands. The Earldom refers to the English town of Sandwich in Kent — from the Old English Sandwic, meaning "sand place".wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandwich)

Abstract

Nov 15, 2006, 05:15 AM

Or, if I understand you correctly, are you saying that the mall's food experts were not the signers - it was the mall's administration, who would not be viewed as understanding a broader interpretation? The mall needs food experts to be around to define what a sandwich is? If I was mall administration, I don't think that would have been the 1st thing I'd consider. I would maybe have a lawyer present, at most, and not because of the word sandwich. Why? Common sense. I don't think the case should ever even make it to court because I think the judge would just laugh at this one.

Can I ask why you think that the clause wouldn't hold up in court?

Because it's a sandwich! :o The other terms and conditions should be understood, but a sandwich is a sandwich! Do lawyers always try to make things complicated? (rhetorical question, really)

Is a won ton also a sandwich? Damn it....no more chinese takeaway! Ice cream sandwiches? Goodbye Dairy Queen!

First we're the home of the highest crime rate in the US. Now we're the home of some idiots who think a burrito is a sandwich.

Exactly.

WildCowboy

Nov 15, 2006, 03:02 PM

On the surface, it seems idiotic, but it really is quite valid. This is a big deal to the existing restaurant...do they have to face competition within the mall or not? To most of us, it's obvious that a burrito is not a sandwich. But where do you draw the line? Clearly a club sandwich with three pieces of bread is accepted as a sandwich even though it doesn't meet the usual strict definition of one. What about a wrap? If it has all the innards of a sandwich but is wrapped in a tortilla, is it a sandwich?

wmmk

Nov 21, 2006, 12:20 AM

No Jewish deli's in Surrey?

I love double-deckers.

there are 3 Jewish Delis in the world, Manny's on Maxwell street in Chicago and New York Bagel and Biali and Kaufman's on Dempster steet in Skokie (a Chicago suburb)

-::ubermann::-

Nov 28, 2006, 12:17 AM