picture alliance/Getty Images

Subway's public relations team rushed to get ahead of a potential PR disaster from a lawsuit claim that the franchise serves mystery meat to its customers.

A lawsuit filed by two plaintiffs in California claims an independent laboratory tested a Subway tuna fish sandwich and found the sandwich did not contain tuna or even fish.

"The products are made from a mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna, yet have been blended together by Defendants to imitate the appearance of tuna," the lawsuit alleged. "Defendants identified, labeled and advertised the products as 'tuna' to consumers, when in fact they were not tuna."

The news prompted rampant speculation that Subway cuts corners by serving dog, cat or even human flesh that are cheaper by the pound than wild-caught tuna from the sea.

"These claims are meritless," a Subway spokesperson said in a statement to MSN's Insider. "Tuna is one of our most popular sandwiches. Our restaurants receive 100% wild-caught tuna, mix it with mayonnaise and serve on a freshly made sandwich to our guests."

Subway's spokesman claims a serving of tuna contains only skipjack and yellowtail tuna from fisheries.

The spokesperson added: "Subway will vigorously defend itself against these and any other baseless efforts to mischaracterize and tarnish the high-quality products that Subway and its franchisees provide to their customers, in California and around the world, and intends to fight these claims through all available avenues if they are not immediately dismissed."

In 2020, Subway lost a lawsuit in an Irish court that ruled Subway sandwich rolls could not be legally defined as "bread" because of the high sugar content.

Photo may have been deleted

Subway

Most people who order tuna sandwiches from Subway restaurants expect the sandwich to contain some fish in the ingredients.

But a new federal lawsuit claims analysis of Subway tuna sandwiches finds the ingredients do not contain tuna or even fish.

"We found that the ingredients were not tuna and not fish," said one of two attorneys representing two plaintiffs in the lawsuit in an email to The Washington Post.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, claimed the company intentionally made "false and misleading representations about tuna being used as an ingredient."

The lawsuit does not explain what's in the Subway tuna sandwiches.

"As independent testing has repeatedly affirmed, the Products are made from anything but tuna," the lawsuit states. "On the contrary, the Products are made from a mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna, yet have been blended together by Defendants to imitate the appearance of tuna."

Subway denied the claims that the sandwiches don't contain real tuna.

According to Subway's website, the tuna sandwich contains "flaked tuna blended with creamy mayo then topped with your choice of crisp, fresh veggies."

There simply is no truth to the allegations in the complaint that was filed in California,' a company spokesperson told DailyMail.com.

"Subway delivers 100 per cent cooked tuna to its restaurants, which is mixed with mayonnaise and used in freshly made sandwiches, wraps and salads that are served to and enjoyed by our guests," Subway claimed.

"The taste and quality of our tuna make it one of Subway's most popular products and these baseless accusations threaten to damage our franchisees, small business owners who work tirelessly to uphold the high standards that Subway sets for all of its products, including its tuna.

Jussie Smollett

Chicago police say they are "making gains" in the 3-day investigation into the alleged attack on Empire star Jussie Smollet.

The actor claims he was attacked by two masked men who beat him and tied a "noose" around his neck in a homophobic hate crime early Tuesday in downtown Chicago.

Read more »