Last year, the Irish Supreme Court ruled that the “bread ” surrounding sandwiches made by the fast food chain Subway had too much sugar to meet the legal definition of bread. Now the restaurant chain is the subject of a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California targeting its tuna sandwich.
The Washington Post reports: “The star ingredient, according to the lawsuit, is ‘made from anything but tuna.' Based on independent lab tests of ‘multiple samples' taken from Subway locations in California, the ‘tuna' is ‘a mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna, yet have been blended together by defendants to imitate the appearance of tuna,' according to the complaint.”
Legal Newsline adds: “Mark Lanier and colleagues at The Lanier Law Firm of Texas and Shalini Dogra of Dogra Law Group in Santa Monica are pursuing the case, alleging fraud, unjust enrichment and violations of California law. Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin are the plaintiffs. … ‘Defendants have further committed unlawful adulteration by concealing the inferiority of the Products.' The lawsuit doesn't specify what the ‘tuna' is actually made from.”
In an email to the WaPo, the attorneys wrote, “We found that the ingredients were not tuna and not fish.”