Jacques Gastreaux

They probably had to go that far down before they could find someone willing to admit that they used sysco products.

Sam & Harry's has a variety of private rooms that could accomodate you. And, I think Central has a private room, but I don't know how many it can accomodate.

Those collected taxes, such as sales taxes and employment taxes, are pesky. Eventhough the business was operated as a corporation, the law generallyy allows the government to pursue those taxes from the individuals within the corporation responsible for making sure they were paid over to the government.

Just a reminder that there is a $20 Tuesday next week, on the 27th, at Bombay Currey Company. We will be dining at 7:00. Following is a list of those who have signed up. Because the restaurant is somewhat small, there is a waiting list. So if you are on the list but find you are unable to attend, please let me know. Jacques Gastreaux cucas87 crackers Capital Icebox mdt mktye +1 ustreetguy CrescentFresh +1 MBK Catharine

What, the restaurant is going to claim that the ordinance is somehow invalid? He could make that claim, but di doubt he would win. If a foie gras ordinance is invalid, then so is a no smoking ordinance. The ordinance is valid. The restaurnat association in Chitown needs to make a special assessment of its members to create a fund to pay the fines, sort of an foie gras ticket insurance fund.

What, no "orbs?"

I predict that foie gras hang-outs will spring up right outside the city limits; like liquor stores and fireworks stands at the state line. And I wonder if the law could be circumvented with a byofg policy. That way, technically, the restaurannt wouldn't be "selling" foie gras.

I thought the ones this year were better than last year's version. For a picture of last year's foie gras burgers, click here.

There you have it folks.

Spherical objects, in this case, fish eggs?

Now we are geting into the election the restaurant would have to waive the tort and sue in assumpsit. Assumpsit would require the restaurant invoke the remedy of specific performance when the restaurant has already anticipated the tort of breach of contract and protected itself with the liquidated damages clause and provided a means of extracting the damages through the credit card mechanism.

Doctrines such as promissory estoppel and detrimental reliance are equitable doctrines used to supply otherwise lacking necessary elements of a contract and are not needed here. All of the elements of a simple, bilateral contract are present.

If you know enough about contracts, you know that you don't need to sign one for there to be one. Giving your credit card number in exchange for their promise to hold you a seat not only provides the requisite manifestatoin of assent to be bound to the terms of the contract, but also consideration. You did receive something, the promise of a table at a certain time. And they gave up something, the opportunity to offer to hold that table for another customer. Trying to weasel your way out of paying for something you received is not exactly honorable conduct. Just to be clear, and to cut down on all the PMs I'm getting, the giving of the credit card number to hold the reservation, regadless whether the restaurant is authorized to ding the card in the eventg of a no show, is the equivalent of signing the contract. The further agreement allowing the restaurnat to ding the card for a certain amount is merely a term facilitating payment of what we would call "liquidated damages" for failing to show up. The consideration component would be the restaurant's agreement to hold the table for you and not give it to someone else. If this were a law school exam question I would go into stuff such as offer and acceptance, but it's not necessary here. The point is, all the elements of a contract are present.

You seem to draw a distinctin between working it out with the restaurant and resolving the charge with the credit card company. Assuming you are unable to work it out with the restaurant, is it your contention that you can still resist the credit card charge by challenging the charge with the cradit card issuer? If so, on what ground. Add to the mix, assume a restaurant that has insisted on a signed contract that includes the name of the credit card issuer and the credit card number, including card expiration date and other credit card verification information, giving authorization to charge your account in the event of a failure to cancel the reservation within the agreed time frame.

Would that argument fly (no pun intended) if you bought a nonrefundable airline ticket, failed to show up for your flight, and then challenged the credit card charge?

What would be your grounds for disputing the charge?

If airlines adopted this sort of pricing policy, it would result in higher prices for some (those that tend to make reservsations well in advance when the fares are low) and lower prices for others (business travelers who make reservations at the last minute or those who just procrastinate or are impulsive). Or how about resort hotels which have a high and a low season. But that is not the real world. Restaurants just have a "high season" a few days a year.

Now you see the reason some restaurants require contracts. If they have a signed contract, they stand a much better chance of defeating any challenge to the credit card charge for failing to show up. Not all people are as honorable as you.

Ahh, the real question. Komi was fabulous. I give both the food and the service A+. There were four of us at the table and between us we got to sample just about everything on the menu. There were so many things I can't remember them all. We had a routine whereby when a course came, we all had something different. We'd each take bite or two and then pass our plates clockwise until the plates were empty. I damn near needed a wheel chair to get out of there.

But my comments were limited to "top tier" restaurants.

Komi's prices were 166% of normal and the caviar and foie gras did not justify that much of a price increase. Not complaining, I went in with my eyes open.ETA: And just out of curiosity, were the prices charged at the bar different than what they were charging guests in the Bistro last night? Does it seem unreasonable for a restaurant to charge the same price for the same meal regardless where in the restaurant you decide to dine?

-->*<--

Just to be clear, my point has nothing to do with Eve. Many of the top tier restaurants raise their prices at times such as NYE and VD. My view is that it's unfair to tar a particular establishment when the practice is so widespread.

You were lucky because of the weather.

And just where did these trends start? The first pork belly I ever encountered was at Eve. Other firsts for me at Eve: tripe, eels, fresh sardines, lamb liver and kidneys. There's always something new and unusual at Eve. When I was in there for the lickety split lunch yesterday, the meat guy was delivering a whole veal calf and I mean whole. It included the head, the inndards (stomach, intestines), the whole darned thing.