Subway Footlong Sandwiches

October 2017: This action was voluntarily dismissed, the reasons for which have not been disclosed.

August 2017: The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s decision to approve the settlement finding that it does not benefit the class in any meaningful way and “enriches only class counsel and, to a lesser degree, the class representatives.”

February 2016: A federal judge granted final approval of the settlement.

October 2015: A federal judge preliminarily approved a settlement of this false advertising lawsuit regarding the length of Subway’s Footlong Sandwiches.

According to the settlement terms, the company agreed to make or keep various changes in place, including requiring restaurant franchisees to measure the bread to ensure that it is either six or twelve inches long, and disclosing that the size and shape of bread may vary. The company agreed to keep the changes in place for at least four years. The settlement does not provide class members with any monetary relief.

A final fairness hearing is scheduled for January 15, 2016. For more information, go to www.subsettlement.com.

(In Re: Subway Footlong Sandwich Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, Case No. 13-cv-675, E.D. Wis.)

December 2013: Multiple lawsuits alleging that SUBWAY® restaurants misleadingly represent that the “Footlong” sandwiches are one foot when the sandwiches are actually “routinely” shorter than twelve inches were consolidated and transferred to the same court to be heard together. More information about each of the cases is below:

  • Buren v. Doctor’s Associates Inc., Case No. 13-cv-498, N.D. Ill.
  • Gross v. Doctor’s Associates Inc., Case No. 13-cv-601, N.D. Ill.
  • Pendak et al v. Subway Sandwich Shops, Inc. et al, Case No. 13-cv-918, D.N.J.
  • Leslie v. Doctor’s Associates Inc., et al, Case No. 13-cv-465, D.N.J.
  • Springer v. Doctor’s Associates Inc., Case No. 13-cv-143, E.D. Cal.
  • Roseman v. Subway Sandwich Shops, Inc. et al, Case No. 13-cv-793, E.D. Penn.
  • Gotter v. Doctor’s Associates Inc., Case No. 13-cv-5033, W.D. Ark.
  • Zeqiri v. Doctor’s Associates Inc., Case No. 13-cv-675, E.D. Wis.
  • Nobles v. Doctor’s Associates Inc., Case No. 13-cv-1767, N.D. Cal.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , , ,



Leave a Reply

Back to Top ↑
  • Search Class-Action Tracker



  • Recent Class Actions

  • The Class-Action Tracker is intended to notify consumers about false advertising class-action lawsuits filed around the country, but does not necessarily reflect TINA.org’s opinion with respect to the lawsuits or disposition of the cases