Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
Red Lobster lies about the sustainability of its shrimp and lobster — which comes from environmentally harmful and inhumane suppliers — misleading consumers and causing them, the animals, and the environment harm, a new class action lawsuit alleges.
The class action lawsuit was filed in California on June 11 by lead Plaintiff Dezzi Rae Marshall, who alleges that Red Lobster and its affiliates engaged in deceptive marketing and sale of its Maine lobster and shrimp products as “sustainable,” when they may be sourced from suppliers that use environmentally harmful and inhumane practices.
According to the claim, Red Lobster’s Maine lobsters are sourced from suppliers that use environmentally destructive practices that threaten endangered populations of North American right whales.
Furthermore, its shrimp items are sourced from industrial shrimp farms that do not employ the highest environmental or animal welfare standards, the claim states. It adds that Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch recommends that consumers seeking sustainable seafood should not choose shrimp from the regions that Red Lobster sources from, because of environmentally destructive practices, poor reporting of environmental data and standards, and overuse of antibiotics.
“Moreover, Red Lobster shrimp suppliers use inhumane practices including routine eyestalk ablation, a practice in which the eyestalk gland of female shrimps is crushed, burned, or cut off—without painkillers—in order to increase reproduction,” the claim states.
Due to concerns about sustainability, consumers are increasingly concerned with how their food is produced and Red Lobster capitalized on consumer demands for sustainably sourced seafood that follows high environmental and animal welfare standards, the claim says.
“Red Lobster also knows that consumers will pay more for such products than they will for products sourced from suppliers that use unsustainable, environmentally harmful, and/or inhumane practices, or will purchase more of the products they believe to be sustainably sourced.”
To capture this growing market, Red Lobster makes prominent marketing claims on its restaurant menu that its menu items are sustainable, for example stating on the cover of Red Lobster’s menu “SEAFOOD WITH STANDARDS” and “Traceable. Sustainable. Responsible.”
Reasonable consumers who see Red Lobster’s Sustainability Representations would expect that the products are sourced sustainably in accordance with the highest environmental and animal welfare standards, the class action lawsuit says.
That was the case for Marshall, who ate at Red Lobster thinking that the shrimp and lobster she was buying was sustainably caught, “and thus, were not sourced from suppliers that use environmentally harmful and inhumane practices.”
The Gulf of Maine lobster fishery, where Red Lobster gets its lobster from, has been found to frequently kill and injure marine mammals, including whales, in its fishing practices, the claim states. The restaurant sources its shrimp from farms in Indonesia, Vietnam, India, and China, which utilize unsustainable and inhumane high-density industrial farming methods to increase production, it adds.
According to the class action lawsuit, the farms contribute to mangrove destruction and environmental degradation, and “poor water quality on farms in these regions causes high levels of stress to the shrimp who ‘struggle to breathe.’
“By deceiving consumers about the nature and sourcing of the Products, Red Lobster has sold a greater volume of the Products, been able to charge higher prices for the Products than otherwise, and has taken away market share from competing products, thereby increasing its own sales and profits,” the claim states.
Marshall wants to represent anyone in California who bought shrimp or lobster at Red Lobster. She is suing for violations of California consumer and advertising laws and seeks certification of the Class, damages, order of enjoinment, legal fees, and a jury trial.
Do you eat at Red Lobster? What are your thoughts on the sourcing of their seafood? Let us know in the comments section!
Marshall is represented by Matthew Strugar of Law Office Of Matthew Strugar and Jay R. Shooster of Richman Law & Policy
The Red Lobster False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Marshall vs. Red Lobster Management, LLC, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-04786, in the U.S. District Court Central District of California.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Subaru vehicle data collection class action lawsuit investigation
May 17, 2024 | Legal News
109 thoughts onRed Lobster Lies About the Sustainability of Its Shrimp, Lobster, Class Action Lawsuit Claims
Add me
I used to work for Red Lobster (RL) so I know what’s going on and dont want to be added to the law suite since I still work in the fish industry but consumers have the right to know. RL used to have great standards but they started to slip after the company was spun off from Darden and sold to Golden Gate Capital. There used to be a team of 17 seafood specialists that worked there between SE Asia, Latin America, USA, Canada, India, and China and did visit factories but that has been reduced to 2 specialists, one in Thailand and another in Canada. RL doesn’t have specialists in each of its suppliers twice per year since there are too many processors worldwide to get around and they don’t have the budget since seafood is the costliest protein on the market. RL relies on their importers…like asking the fox to look after the hen house. Red Lobster buys on price and the shrimp they have in the restaurants have all been treated with phosphates to increase water weight 5-10%…that makes it cheaper. They will also buy on the market if there is an advantage and that is not produced to RL specifications. They used to have a great fresh fish program developed by Darden consisting of around 17 different species but that is now down to 2, trout and tilapia in Canada the rest including salmon, haddock, cod and pollock etc are frozen… I would always question their FAQ “While some seafood can be delivered from the water to our restaurants fresh and never frozen…” the important word is “can”…lots of things “can” be anything, but the reality is fresh distribution is too costly so they use frozen to get cheap distribution costs…so much for RL brand promise on the front sign “Fresh Fish… and Live Lobster” although the lobster from the tank is live. Another interesting point on sustainability and particularly welfare. They used to source spiny lobster only from trap caught in Honduras and Nicaragua since dive caught was associated with divers getting injured from the bends. That was verified by the specialists but ask RL if the spiny lobster is trap caught or diver caught now. They used to keep records from seafood specialist visits when they had inspectors. They wont anymore because the inspectors in Honduras, Costa Rica and Ecuador were all furloughed in 2020 and don’t work for RL anymore and it costs too much to bring in the last 2 from Thailand or Canada. RL also states they regularly audit their supply chain for human rights abuses. Ask them the last time they did that for shrimp from India, Indonesia or China and see if they have documents…and don’t forget the lobster divers in Honduras. Last point is they make a big deal about illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU) but ask if the feeds used to feed the fish eg salmon contain fish meal from IUU free fisheries…RL wont know the answer since they don’t ask the questions anymore. And the inspector/specialists they love to mention…they are not on the full time payroll but classed as contractors…easier to cut when necessary. The reality is that RL was a great company even after Bill Darden sold it and up until it was sold by Darden in 2014…the reality now is that it isn’t a great company…its cost driven by a Thai owner…yes, the same company that was involved in the Tuna price fixing scandal of 2017…Thai Union…so much for Seafood with Standards.
Add me
My husband and I have been going there since we began dating back in the late 80’s. It’s been one of his favorites that we still visit. So sad to learn of this.
Add me
Add me please. I’ve eaten there because of humane Britons. This isn’t so as i finds out. Several times a year we travel an hour and half to dine at red lobster. We will not be doing so anymore. Please add me
Just had take out last week,I’m a usual once a week customer.
PLEASE ADD ME
Please add me in. Wont be going bavk there to eat again. Wrong, so wrong. How cruel!
Please Add Me, Cant believe they are charging for premium shrimp when it isn’t.
Please add me.
I eat at Red Lobster a lot.
I can’t believe they don’t use good, safe, and clean suppliers
Add me
Please add me