It was most likely a mistake on the part of the Chipotle workers rather than them actively desiring to cause you emotional harm, and they offered you a refund and the ability to submit a complaint as an attempt to make up for the mistake. Even if you could take legal action, I would say it would be unethical in this situation to do so. At the very least, it would be a significant overreaction given that neither you nor they intended for chicken to end up in your dish.

At what point do your dietary restrictions become someone else's responsibility? From a legal standpoint, I suppose this isn't a bad question (other than the fact millions of food orders are wrong every day, making this one not special). From a personal standpoint, this is absurd, unless you are claiming they did it on purpose to spite your religion. You should probably clarify your question.

@Clay07g When a restaurant advertises being vegan/vegetarian friendly, it means to me that restaurant unserstands how important being vegan is to someone. Chipotle, in this case, is advertising the rice bowl is vegan approved so it definitely does become their responsibility to ensure the meal is vegan because I am putting my blind faith in them.

“I am putting my blind faith in them”: I truly envy the trust you put in perfect strangers.

@user559788 Chipotle prepares their food right in front of you. Right beside the meat. Your meal was prepared not 2 feet away from about a dozen animal products. If you have vision, these risks are clear. Chipotle doesn't care about vegans, they care about sales. As a vegan, stop going there. They aren't making great effort to adapt to your restrictions. That does not in any way entitle you to monetary compensation, other than a refund. Chipotle made a mistake, they aren't trying to trick you. There's nothing illegal about poor service.

What damages would you claim?

See the instance where McDonalds paid $10 million for advertising that its fries were vegetarian (NYT 2001, CNN 2002). But this was systematic misrepresentation; a CNN 2011 article on the case of the NJ restaurant (also mentioned in one of the answers below) says an isolated mix-up incident may not be as compelling.

Something closer to this case: an article on Taco Bell (LA Times, 1999) settling for an unknown sum with a customer who was seeking $144,000. (Based on these examples, I suspect you may also find it interesting to contact religious organizations with experience with this sort of thing; surely this kind of mistake happens with some frequency.)

@JAB I disagree that it would be unethical to take legal action. I am not a vegetarian or vegan - I love meat - but how would you feel if you accidentally ate cat or dog, because of someone else's mistake? Would it be any more ethical to press charges in this instance? Because it shouldn't.

@EdmundReed I certainly would not feel good about it (I grew up with both) and it would probably make things awkward, but if it were an honest mistake then I would not hold it against those who accidentally served it to me, particularly if I did not make it clear to the servers that they should be extra careful to not put in dog or cat meat. If, on the other hand, I were talking about how much I love my cat and was then purposely served cat meat despite requesting something else, I would certainly want to take action. Though I'm not sure I'd go as far as suing over it even then.

They made a mistake. They acknowledged it. They offered refund and possibility to file a complaint. Why would you need to sue them if they voluntarily offered to pay for that mistake? Becoming upset simply because someone made a mistake is rude. You could be upset if they were refusing to acknowledge. One can only avoid mistakes if he doesn't do anything. Now all that you want is to get easy money from them and it has nothing to do with the harm their mistake has created. You should have accepted their offer if it was important for you to get compensation.

@EdmundReed: The crucial bit you're brushing under the rug is how on Earth you would eat cat or dog meat unless the restaurant already served it. If it mysteriously appears out of nowhere in a restaurant that advertises nothing of the sort, you have every right to be outraged. If it appears because it accidentally came from the tray right beside the one you ordered, you don't freak out, you realize that was a naturally inherent risk in choosing to order from this restaurant; you move on. Same goes for any other kind of food, whether it's beef, dog meat, peanut butter, or lettuce.

@user559788: People have already lectured you about how it's common sense that there will be some cross-contamination when the ingredients are next to each other right in front of you, but let me also just say that if this is due to a religious reason, you might want to double-check that your religion is really so unforgiving about this incident. The religion(s) I'm aware of are forgiving about unintentional things like this that occur despite reasonable efforts on your part to the contrary. You'd spit out your food, rinse/clean your mouth, and move on. No need for eternal damnation.

You know how when you buy something in a supermarket and it says on the packet "made in an environment that processes milk, nuts, etc, etc.", well you going to a non-vegan restaurant and asking for vegan produce is you knowing full well that they prepare meat in that environment. If you are that strict about it, DON'T GO TO A RESTAURANT THAT SERVES MEAT.

@user559788 No, the restaurant have absolutely no idea how your vegetarianism is important to you. In fact, nobody has - until you tell them your story.

Transferring campsites in France once, we were served an evening "meal". My GF pointed out she was vegetarian and asked for the meat-free option. When the meal arrived, it consisted of a sausage pizza (defrosted supermarket variety). Her pizza had no meat on it - only little round dents in the cheese where they'd picked the sausage off before serving...

Aside from it being a simple accident, they have a disclaimer on the "Allergens & Special Diets" page of their website that states "Individual foods may come into contact with one another during preparation", so I don't think you'd get very far.

What are you trying to accomplish? Crass cash payout i.e. Legal lottery win? Get warm fuzzies of getting a judge to agree you're right? Restrain Chipotle to do a specific thing to change how they work? Get religious forgiveness?

The use of the legal system to pursue religion-based behavior is beneath disgusting. If your god is going to punish you, or punish Chipotle, for what happened, then you should have no need of legal support. Yes I know this isn't a comment about law, but if I were a judge I'd fine you for frivolous and malicious behavior.

Agreed. This would be the kind of lawsuit that only comes off as malicious and self-serving. It is very unlikely, I suspect, that you would win the sympathy of the judge or jury. Instead, they and the public would likely see this as an attempt for a quick payday.

Let me get this straight. Your religion says dont eat meat. Your religion says dont forgive any sinners. Is that how it goes? I bet it isn't. Even the thought of suing a private entity like this is kind of gross. It almost implies that we must live in a world where any business must sign a contract with every customer, no matter the service. So next time you go to chipotle, bring your lawyer to make sure one of the chicken pieces doesnt stick to the spoon.