District Court Complaint Says Egg-Marketer Misrepresents Conditions Accorded Hens

Friday, September 11, 2026

Page 3

District Court Complaint Says Egg-Marketer Misrepresents Conditions Accorded Hens

By a MetNews Staff Writer

Above is a screenshot from the website of Pete and Gerry’s Organics, LLC. A complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California contends that some hens laying Pete ad Gerry’s eggs do not enjoy the free roaming that’s portrayed.

A putative class action has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California accusing Pete and Gerry’s Organics, LLC of deceptively marketing eggs as “Free Range” or “Pasture Raised.”

The representation as to the conditions under which the chickens are kept “is a far cry from the truth for the hens laying the Egg Products,” the complaint, filed Wednesday, asserts.

While Pete and Gerry’s says on its website that “[o]ur hens live the low-stress life all chickens deserve because we believe in a life well-lived for hens and humans alike,” the pleading portrays a markedly contrary posture, in practice.

‘Crammed,’ ‘Confined’

Sherman Oaks attorney Michael H. Pearson of Pearson Warshaw, LLP, said in a pleading filed on behalf of Huntington Beach resident Michael Carter and “all others similarly situated” (with paragraph numbering omitted):

“[T]he hens laying the Egg Products are stocked in facilities where they are crammed and confined so closely together that a significant number of hens are incapable of gaining access to the outdoors and experience severe distress, trauma and illness.

“No reasonable consumer would consider the Egg Products ‘Free Range’ or ‘Pasture Raised’ if they knew the hens supplying them were confined in such a restrictive manner that prevented a significant number of hens laying the Egg Products from exiting to roam outdoors freely in fields and pastures. They certainly do not expect the hens to be stuck inside warehouse-like facilities where they experience severe trauma.”

Knowledge of Falsity

The pleading—which tells of drone-surveillance of local suppliers of eggs to Pete and Gerry’s, a nationwide operation headquartered in New Hampshire, goes on to say:

“Defendant is well aware that an ever-growing population of consumers in the United States believes it is important that the food industry, including egg sellers such as Pete & Gerry’s, treat chickens and, specifically, laying hens, humanely—with sufficient attention to their needs and natural behaviors, including roaming freely outdoors, as Defendant has deceptively promised.

“Defendant has capitalized on the knowledge that these consumers base their purchasing decisions on their perceptions of animal welfare, including whether the animals are afforded meaningful access to the outdoors, adequate space, and freedom of movement. These consumers are willing to pay a premium for products, including eggs, they believe come from animals who have access to the outdoors, adequate space, and freedom of movement based on representations such as those included in Defendant’s Deceptive Egg Product Marketing.”

Lucrative Enterprise

The complaint avers:

“Defendant has achieved an annual revenue estimated by third party sources to be well over $450 million as a result of its deceptive, fraudulent, unfair and unlawful conduct.”

Claims are stated under three California statutes—the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the False Advertising Law, and the Unfair Competition Act—as well as under statutes of other states inuring to the benefit of members of a multi-state class, in addition to common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment. The complaint seeks actual and punitive damages, attorney fees, ad other relief.

Pete and Gerry’s-brand eggs are sold in major markets in Los Angeles including Ralphs, Vons, Smart and Finals, Bristol Farms, Whole Foods, and Target.

The defendant did not respond to a request for comment.

The case is Carter v. Pete and Gerry’s Organics, LLC, 8:26-cv-02550.