Jack in the Box (JACK) dropped in yesterday's after-hours session upon news of the company's Q4 results. You can't blame the bottom line for the poor stock performance. The fast-food joint earned 70 cents per share from continuing operations versus the 45 cents per share from continuing operations earned in the comparable quarter. Did such a growth rate deserve a nearly 6% cut in share price? Analysts were only looking for 55 cents per share, according to Earnings.com.

Well, Wall Street apparently wasn't satisfied with the outlook, as this Reuters article points out. Traders are obviously more concerned with where Jack in the Box may be heading as opposed to where it's been.

Many years ago, when I was in law school, I had to read lots of boring legal cases. From time to time, though, there would be a crazy case to liven things up.

Well, we got one recently. Panera Bread (NASDAQ:PNRA), which is a large bakery-cafe chain, sued Qdoba Mexican Grill, which is owned by Jack in the Box (NYSE:JBX). Qdoba wanted to move into a mall in Shrewsbury, Massachusetts. The mall already had a Panera, and Panera's lawyers had cleverly negotiated an important clause in its lease agreement: the mall was prohibited from renting to another sandwich shop.

The ruling? The judge dismissed Panera's claim. His analysis was that, technically speaking, a burrito is not a sandwich. Simply put, a burrito involves only one tortilla, whereas a sandwich has two slices of bread.

Yes, it looks like he's on solid ground. Of course, Panera's attorneys disagree and will appeal.

It's enough to make me wish I were back in law school.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including the Complete M&A Handbook and operates InvestorOffering.com.