Is a Burrito a Sandwich? Judge Says No
- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (13)
The notion would be absurd to anyone with a dictionary, or any common sense.
- 3 votes
A burrito is more like a wrap, and it is definitely no the same as a sandwich. If I pay for a sandwich and they give me wrap, I would be pretty upset and would not buy that product...
I don't go to Taco Bell because I want something like Subway (and I don't even go to either one)
"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,"
Ahhh, law students will be required to memorize that one. That is so going down in lawbook history as one of the best quotes ever written in a judgement.
- 11 votes
Panera is pretty much ensuring I never eat there. Are they that afraid of culinary competition? That's the most embarrassing and absurd waste of court time and resources I've seen in a long time.
Boycott 'em.
- 2 votes
I'd like it very much if the Mexican restaurant happens to have an agreement to be the exclusive seller of burritos and takes Panera to court for selling burritos.
- 3 votes
Ha. I really love Panera, so it makes me sad to see them do something stupid like this. But then again, they've got to do what they can to compete. If that means throwing something stupid against the wall and hoping that it sticks, then so be it. It's a dumb argument that a burrito is a sandwich, but if it had worked, it wouldn't look so silly because they'd have been able to force-out a strong competitor. Don't get me wrong, it's a very silly argument, but I'm not going to hold it against them.
Honestly, I'm surprised they got away with a "We won't let any competition in this mall" clause in their lease, that's @!$%#ing crazy.
- 1 vote
I certainly wouldn't hold it against Panera if they had to cover Qdoba Mexican Grill's legal expenses for bringing forth such a ridiculous lawsuit now that they've been summarily beaten down.
Unfortunatley, that's not the case.
- 1 vote
Honestly, I'm surprised they got away with a "We won't let any competition in this mall" clause in their lease, that's @!$%#ing crazy.
Not crazy at all. Non-competition clauses are very common.
- 3 votes
Has anyone actually eaten at Jack-in-the-Box and not had a gastrointestinal maneuver (!) as a result? Now that'd be one for the record books.
Does anyone remember the God-awful Mexican food they had some years back?
If Qdoba is to Mexican food like Crap-In-The-Box is to burgers, I don't think Panera has anything to worry about.
* ...blechhh....urp....gurgle....*
- 1 vote
Ah, but Qdoba is not to Mexican food as Jack-in-the-box is to burgers. Qdoba uses fairly fresh and healthy ingredients and doesn't cause the gastrointestinal issues Taco Bell is so well-known for.
And Panerra uses quality ingredients, too. Thing is, if I want a delicious sandwich on fresh bread, I'll head to Panerra. If I want a delicious burrito made with fresh veggies, I'll head to Qdoba.
There's room at the table for everybody, man.
Perhaps they should have included a no-competition clause based on soup. I bet that'd make Panera the only option in the mall. Is a stew a soup? Oh, the legal wranglings would be endless.
- 3 votes
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |


