Kroger faces more legal troubles

Few things can cost a company more than a lawsuit.

Liability costs alone cost businesses $160 billion per year, according to Kolmogorov law firm. That’s not counting attorney fees, employment disputes, or IP infringement cases.

Every business, large and small, is at risk of a lawsuit. While companies try to anticipate legal costs, an unexpected legal dispute can set a business back by millions.

Most recently, grocery stores have been facing several lawsuits, which have hurt their bottom line.

And now Kroger is the latest grocery chain to face allegations that are likely to cost the chain a hefty penny in legal fees alone.

Kroger being sued yet again

Kroger is facing a new lawsuit regarding its meat-labeling practices.

In a complaint filed on March 20 in LA, advocacy group Animal Outlook alleges that Kroger and its subsidiary Ralphs have misled shoppers by how it labels its meat products.

The main dispute is over how Ralphs displays its signage. According to the complaint, some locations use signage that says “raised naturally,” “no antibiotics” and “no added hormones.”

But Animal Outlook alleges that products sold under these signs do not meet the standards shoppers expect and are often products from normal commercial farming.

Ben Williamson, executive director of Animal Outlook, accused Kroger of selling shoppers the same factory-farmed meat sold elsewhere.

“This is textbook humane-washing,” he stated. “Kroger is exploiting consumer concern about animal welfare and food safety by plastering reassuring language across their meat departments while doing absolutely nothing to ensure the products actually meet those claims.”

Kroger did not respond to a request for comment.

A lawsuit alleges that Kroger is misleading shoppers.

Shutterstock

Kroger faces allegations of false advertising

Animal Outlook alleges that the products sold at Ralphs have no special indicators of the welfare of the animals or any certifications, and that these statements are misleading.

In one location, Animal Outlook found pork products under a sign that said “no antibiotics,” which a third-party safety report says could contain antibiotics, the lawsuit alleges.

This violates California’s False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law, the lawsuit against Kroger contends.

Animal Outlook is seeking a court order requiring Kroger and Ralphs to either stock products that meet the claims made on the signs or to remove the signs. The organization also wants the company to inform consumers that the products in question may not be antibiotic-free or well-raised.

Bryan W. Pease, an attorney for Animal Outlook, said California law is clear about false and misleading statements.

“Kroger knows what products it stocks and what attributes those products do and do not have,” he said.

“When you put up a sign that says ‘no antibiotics’ or ‘well raised,’ consumers reasonably expect the products beneath those signs to match those claims. Kroger’s failure to ensure that is a violation of California law, and we’re asking the court to put a stop to it.”

More retail stocks

Kroger has been accused of false advertising before. In 2024, it was sued by a consumer who alleged that its farm-fresh eggs did not come from hens that were uncaged and living on a farm. The lawsuit was dismissed because the eggs did come from a farm, even though they were caged, Reuters reported.

Meanwhile, a separate ongoing case alleges that Kroger’s dog food is falsely advertised as premium and preservative-free when it contains artificial preservatives, according to Top Class Actions.  

Legal trouble at supermarkets

Related: More trouble brewing for Albertsons and Kroger