Subway hit with more lawsuits over the amount of steak in its ‘cheesesteak’ sandwich

Subway might not put a lot of meat in their cheesesteak, but lawyers filing complaints of false advertising are on a roll.

Earlier this month, The Inquirer shared the story of one customer who was so disappointed with the cheesesteak sandwich at a Subway franchise that he filed a proposed class-action lawsuit in Philadelphia federal court. The South Carolina man specifically took offense with the discrepancy between the amount of meat advertised versus the petty offering on his plate.

» READ MORE: One customer was so unhappy with Subway’s cheesesteak, he filed a proposed class-action lawsuit against the chain

“After he picked up and began eating his sandwich, Plaintiff realized that there was barely any steak in the sandwich and that the photographs that he relied on were grossly misleading,” that complaint says.

Apparently, he wasn’t the only one.

There are two other proposed federal class-action lawsuits making the same claims, meaning the court saga of Subway’s “Steak & Cheese” offering now spans coast to coast. Subway did not respond to requests for comment.

The Subway cheesesteak litigation trend seems to have started, as many hip trends do, in Brooklyn.

Lawyers filed the first complaint in the Southern District of New York on behalf of Anna Tollison, saying she was moved to sue after she, “picked up and began eating her sandwich, Plaintiff realized that there was barely any steak in the sandwich and that the photographs that she relied on were grossly misleading.”

About two weeks later, Subway was hit with a second complaint, this time in Philadelphia. The same law firm that filed the Philadelphia lawsuit also filed a lawsuit against Subway on behalf of a California woman in California federal court.

The unhappy customer in that case is Heather Deruelle, a resident of Albemarle, Calif., who was similarly disappointed by her cheesesteak order.

Can you guess what happened that led her to take legal action?

“After she picked up and began eating her sandwich, Plaintiff realized that there was barely any steak in the sandwich and that the photographs that she relied on were grossly misleading,” the Middle District of North California complaint said.

Sure sounds familiar.

In journalism, plagiarism is a cardinal sin. But in the legal world (outside of academic halls), plagiarizing is common, allowed, and even essential. Law professors Megan Boyd and Brian Frye explain in a Washington University Law Review article that copying and pasting saves lawyers time, clients money, and allows lawyers to stick to phrasing that previously worked in court.

“As a practicing lawyer, if you aren’t plagiarizing, you’re committing malpractice,” the professors wrote.

Lawyers for Deruelle and Tollison could not immediately be reached for comment.

We will give Tollison and her attorneys credit for being the first, and also for including in the lawsuit a photo of her sandwich. We also appreciate their effort to make the lawsuit relevant to current events.

“Subway actions are especially concerning now that inflation, food, and meat prices are very high and many consumers, especially lower income consumers, are struggling financially,” the complaint said.

All three complaints state that the cheesesteak photographed in advertisements contained “at least 200% more meat” than the one their clients received.

Anthony Russo, who represents Tollison, told USA Today that his firm has experience with fast-food litigation and that these types of lawsuits often get dismissed. But the gap between the cheesesteak advertised by Subway and the product they serve is “much more egregious” than other cases he has seen, he said.