Sharky’s Woodfired Mexican Grill Mahi Mahi Class Action Lawsuit

Sharky’s Woodfired Mexican Grill has been hit with a class action lawsuit claiming the restaurant chain sells Mahi Mahi dishes that don’t actually contain Mahi Mahi.

The Sharky’s restaurant class action lawsuit was filed by four customers who claim the healthy fast-food chain has been selling Mahi Mahi dishes for the past four years that are made with a different kind of fish, but hasn’t been telling customers. The dishes targeted in the lawsuit include Sharky’s Tempura Mahi Mahi Tacos, World Famous Tempura Mahi Mahi Tacos, and Mahi Mahi Power Plate. According to the class action lawsuit, Sharky’s admits on its website that the menu items don’t actually contain Mahi Mahi, but does not disclose this fact on the menu board prominently displayed above the ordering station and the cash register at each Sharky’s restaurant, or on the printed menus at the restaurant.

Had these customers known they were purchasing dishes that didn’t contain Mahi Mahi, they never would have bought the menu items, the class action lawsuit claims.

The Sharky’s Mahi Mahi class action lawsuit is brought on behalf of all customers who, within the past four years, purchased a food product from a California Sharky’s restaurant that was falsely represented as being made from Mahi Mahi fish.

It is seeking compensatory damages, punitive damages, restitution and more for alleged negligent misrepresentation, intentional misrepresentation, breach of express warranty, and violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law.

A copy of the Sharky’s Woodfired Mexican Grill False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit can be read here.

The case is Duana Chenier, et al. v. Sharky’s Franchises Group, LLC, et al., Case No. 30-2012-587784-CU-BT-CXC, Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange.

UPDATE: This article has been updated to better reflect the verbiage used in the lawsuit after Top Class Actions was contacted by attorneys representing Sharky’s Franchise Group, LLC, Sharky’s Beverly Hills, Inc. and Fin City Foods, Inc. The original article used words like “phony” and “fake Mahi Mahi,” which the attorneys felt may have left readers with the false impression that Sharky’s was serving meals that were made with fake food. The terms “fake” and “phony” were not used in the complaint; they were used by the article author as a more succinct way to say Sharky’s is accused of making “false representations” about the ingredients that are “false, misleading, deceptive, unlawful and fraudulent under the UCL.” [Emphasized statements taken from the complaint.] The dishes are not plastic, inedible or otherwise repulsive — they simply may not contain the kind of fish that was advertised.

UPDATE #2: Sharky’s attorneys have advised Top Class Actions that the language “Something’s fishy at Sharky’s…” used in the original and updated article is objectionable due to the fact that there is no reference in the lawsuit to dispute Sharky’s policy of serving only the highest quality fish.

Updated September 3rd, 2012

All class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Lawsuit News section of Top Class Actions