Posted on 10/22/2009 11:26:23 AM PDT by pikachu
A civil judge in Dallas ruled late Wednesday that the real estate arm of the Subway sandwich chain violated the rights of an Army reservist when it stripped him of his two restaurants while the reservist was serving in Afghanistan. Grant Walsh, an attorney for Leon Batie Jr., said the ruling settles the biggest legal issue in a case that has dragged on for more than two years – that the chain's real estate affiliate broke the law when it terminated leases at two central city Subway franchises without a court order.
(Excerpt) Read more at dallasnews.com ...
From memory, someone politically connected wanted them and Subway obliged. They took them away from the soldier and gave them to the other individual — much like eminent domain. Shame on Subway for thinking they were the government.
Bastards!
Now, Subway is staring down the barrel of a jury award for damages at a time when there's a populist outrage at all things corporate and where there's an incredibly sympathetic plaintiff in a veteran of armed conflict for the United States. That has the makings of a punishing jury award, and it should be IMHO.
Bookmark for later.
Great decision. Haven’t eaten at Subway since I found out about this case. Now, I’ll never go back.
One more reason not to eat at Subway, although I haven’t eaten there since they dissed homeschoolers.
Hope they go broke.
so Subway gives the shaft to our fighting men and women and Quiznos runs disgusting homo-erotic TV commercials. Guess it’s back to Chinese takeout...
Easy now!
I’m familiar with this story.
If you were Subway and a franchise owner bailed out on his store leaving it without any management for months, what would you do?
Find a temporary replacement and then welcome the hero home upon his return.
“If you were Subway and a franchise owner bailed out on his store leaving it without any management for months, what would you do?”
That's not true. He arranged for management of the stores. One of the persons who was supposed to help manage his stores also managed three other Subways. Thus, he wasn't just finding some kid off the street to do the job. Of course, it appears that perhaps that individual was less trustworthy than he should have been, in that he arranged to buy one of the service member's stores from Subway when Subway illegally terminated the lease with the service member.
Kinda like asking your next door neighbor to look after your family while you're away at war, only to come home and find that he's raped your wife and cleaned out your bank accounts.
There are also allegations of fraud on the part of Subway. However, it appears that the judge didn't even need to get to those, in that Subway just so clearly violated the law in the improper terminaton of the leases.
Subway could have legally terminated the leases by going to court and getting a court order, but perhaps they knew that the evidence wouldn't be on their side, and wouldn't withstand the scrutiny of a judge.
Hope Subway gets BOHICA'ed big time on this one. Too bad the plaintiff is only asking six million. If I were a juror, I'd vote for enough to bankrupt Subway.
sitetest
Very nice news!
Setting apart all the angry rhetoric about Subway, what we have here is a man with a failing business.
He used the S/S Relief Act to screw over Subway on what he owed them.
“He used the S/S Relief Act to screw over Subway on what he owed them.”
Subway said that he owed them back rent, but he said he had the canceled checks to prove that he'd paid the rent.
The case didn't get that far. The judge ruled based on the Soldiers and Sailors Act.
However, it's very peculiar that the man who was supposed to manage the stores for him wound up being given one of the stores by Subway after they canceled the lease. And then Subway sold the other store to their own cronies at rock-bottom price.
Nothing fishy about that. No. Not at all.
It maybe fortunate for Subway that the case went no further than it did. Perhaps they should cut their losses and run.
sitetest
“...so Subway gives the shaft to our fighting men and women and Quiznos runs disgusting homo-erotic TV commercials.”
####
Subway has also joined the legion of companies to run commercials featuring loser-type white males, shamed by a dominant black person.
I guess they are appealing to a certain...ahem...demographic with this crap. They cerain have turned off at least one member of my demographic group.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.