Eggland’s Best faces a class action lawsuit over allegedly misleading claims about the living conditions of hens producing their Cage Free eggs. The complaint, filed by James Delaney, Tracy Massenburg, and Amber Motley in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on August 7, 2024, accuses Eggland’s Best, Inc. and Eggland’s Best, LLC of false advertising.
The plaintiffs argue that Eggland’s Best misled consumers by claiming that their Cage Free eggs come from hens “free to roam in a pleasant, natural environment.” According to the lawsuit, this statement is false as many hens are confined indoors year-round in windowless structures with limited space. James Delaney from White Haven, Pennsylvania purchased a carton of these eggs in May 2024 and was willing to pay a premium due to his belief that the hens were treated humanely. Similarly, Tracy Massenburg from Richmond, Virginia bought the eggs in July 2024 under the same impression. Amber Motley from Roanoke, Virginia made her purchase around July 2023 for similar reasons. All three plaintiffs assert they would not have bought or paid extra for these eggs had they known the true conditions.
The plaintiffs allege that Eggland’s Best intentionally misrepresented their product to attract consumers who prioritize animal welfare. They claim this allowed Eggland’s Best to sell their Cage Free eggs at an unearned premium. The lawsuit highlights that while other brands clearly label their products as “free range” or “pasture raised” when applicable, Eggland’s Best used misleading language to suggest similar standards without providing outdoor access or ample space for the hens.
The plaintiffs seek various forms of relief including actual damages, statutory damages under consumer protection laws in Pennsylvania and Virginia, restitution for unjust enrichment, and attorney fees. They argue that these misrepresentations violate several consumer protection statutes including the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law and the Virginia Consumer Protection Act.
Representing the plaintiffs are attorneys Douglas M. Werman and John J. Frawley from Werman Salas P.C., along with Pete Winebrake and Michelle Tolodziecki from Winebrake & Santillo LLC. The case is presided over by Judge Nitza I. Quiñones Alejandro under Case ID: 2:24-cv-3972.