Google Answers Logo
View Question
 
Q: What is a restaurant? ( Answered,   2 Comments )
Question  
Subject: What is a restaurant?
Category: Miscellaneous
Asked by: miguelmh-ga
List Price: $2.00
Posted: 06 Oct 2005 19:46 PDT
Expires: 05 Nov 2005 18:46 PST
Question ID: 577391
What is a restaurant, a product, or a service?

Request for Question Clarification by weisstho-ga on 08 Oct 2005 14:41 PDT
You inquiry almost sounds like a question posed in a business law
class, and particularly posed to have the student think about whether
the Uniform Commercial Code is applicable in a case concerning a
restaurant.

Would you please indicate the context of your question?

BUT, IF THE FOLLOWING IS ADEQUATE, PLEASE INDICATE AND I WILL REPOST
IT AS AN ANSWER. . .

A short answer, a $2.00 answer, would go something like this:

The food served in a restaurant is a "good" as that term is defined in
the Uniform Commercial Code. The conditions of sale, and most
importantly the UCC warranties would apply to the sale of food.

Services would encompass the delivery of the food. 

Where the goods and services are mixed, the question of which part of
the equation predominates is then analyzed, using the standard
enunciated in the seminal case, Bonebrake v. Cox , 499 F.2d 951, 960
(8th Cir. 1974).

The Bonebrake test:  where the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held
that the UCC applied to a hybrid transaction even though it involved a
substantial amount of services in installation of the goods; ?the fact
that the contract involved substantial amounts of labor does not
remove it from inclusion under the Code.?  Bonebrake v Cox, 499 F2d
951, 959 (CA 8, 1974).  The test articulated in Bonebrake has become
legend:

The test for inclusion or exclusion is not whether they are mixed,
but, granting that they are mixed, whether their predominant factor,
their thrust, their purpose, reasonably stated, is the rendition of
service, with goods incidentally involved (e.g., contract with artist
for painting) or is a transaction of sale, with labor incidentally
involved (e.g. installation of a water heater in a bathroom).

Neibarger, 439 Mich at 534, citing Bonebrake, 499 F 2d at 960.

The Neibarger court provided further guidance:

It is difficult to imagine a commercial product which does not require
some type of service prior to its purchase, whether design, assembly,
installation, or manufacture. If a purchaser were able to avoid the
UCC by pleading negligent execution of one of the services required to
produce the product, Article 2 could be easily and effectively
negated. A court faced with this issue should examine the purpose of
the dealings between the parties. If the purchaser's ultimate goal is
to acquire a product, the contract should be considered a transaction
in goods, even though service is incidentally required. Conversely, if
the purchaser's ultimate goal is to procure a service, the contract is
not governed by the UCC, even though goods are incidentally required
in the provision of this service.

Neibarger, 439 Mich at 536 (emphasis added).


The premises itself are property - either real property to the
permanent aspects (land and building)

Clarification of Question by miguelmh-ga on 08 Oct 2005 16:14 PDT
That's an adequate response, thank you.
Answer  
Subject: Re: What is a restaurant?
Answered By: weisstho-ga on 08 Oct 2005 20:38 PDT
 
Here is the repost so that I can earn my fee!!  Thanks so very much
for visiting us.

weisstho-ga

You inquiry almost sounds like a question posed in a business law
class, and particularly posed to have the student think about whether
the Uniform Commercial Code is applicable in a case concerning a
restaurant.

Would you please indicate the context of your question?

BUT, IF THE FOLLOWING IS ADEQUATE, PLEASE INDICATE AND I WILL REPOST
IT AS AN ANSWER. . .

A short answer, a $2.00 answer, would go something like this:

The food served in a restaurant is a "good" as that term is defined in
the Uniform Commercial Code. The conditions of sale, and most
importantly the UCC warranties would apply to the sale of food.

Services would encompass the delivery of the food. 

Where the goods and services are mixed, the question of which part of
the equation predominates is then analyzed, using the standard
enunciated in the seminal case, Bonebrake v. Cox , 499 F.2d 951, 960
(8th Cir. 1974).

The Bonebrake test:  where the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held
that the UCC applied to a hybrid transaction even though it involved a
substantial amount of services in installation of the goods; ?the fact
that the contract involved substantial amounts of labor does not
remove it from inclusion under the Code.?  Bonebrake v Cox, 499 F2d
951, 959 (CA 8, 1974).  The test articulated in Bonebrake has become
legend:

The test for inclusion or exclusion is not whether they are mixed,
but, granting that they are mixed, whether their predominant factor,
their thrust, their purpose, reasonably stated, is the rendition of
service, with goods incidentally involved (e.g., contract with artist
for painting) or is a transaction of sale, with labor incidentally
involved (e.g. installation of a water heater in a bathroom).

Neibarger, 439 Mich at 534, citing Bonebrake, 499 F 2d at 960.

The Neibarger court provided further guidance:

It is difficult to imagine a commercial product which does not require
some type of service prior to its purchase, whether design, assembly,
installation, or manufacture. If a purchaser were able to avoid the
UCC by pleading negligent execution of one of the services required to
produce the product, Article 2 could be easily and effectively
negated. A court faced with this issue should examine the purpose of
the dealings between the parties. If the purchaser's ultimate goal is
to acquire a product, the contract should be considered a transaction
in goods, even though service is incidentally required. Conversely, if
the purchaser's ultimate goal is to procure a service, the contract is
not governed by the UCC, even though goods are incidentally required
in the provision of this service.

Neibarger, 439 Mich at 536 (emphasis added).


The premises itself are property - either real property to the
permanent aspects (land and building)

--------------------------------
Search Strategy:

UCC
Bonebrake
UCC + Services
Comments  
Subject: Re: What is a restaurant?
From: jago8-ga on 07 Oct 2005 07:31 PDT
 
I don't suppose there is any official answer to this, although one
could look at how they are classed by national statistics
organisations.

IMHO, a cheap eating-place is a service, and the more high-end the
restaurant, the more likely it is to be managed as a product, with the
decoration, ambience and desired clientele overtaking the food in
importance.  This is particularly the case for chains.  In fact, I
suppose even cheap chains are managed as a product eg McDonalds.
Subject: Re: What is a restaurant?
From: sircessna-ga on 07 Oct 2005 17:07 PDT
 
Its neither. A restaurant is a "place". 

2 entries found for restaurant.

A place where meals are served to the public.

A building where people go to eat [syn: eating house, eating place]

Important Disclaimer: Answers and comments provided on Google Answers are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Google does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. Please read carefully the Google Answers Terms of Service.

If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you.
Search Google Answers for
Google Answers  


Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy