Lawsuit Alleges Costco Falsely Advertises Popular Chicken as Preservative-Free

A proposed class-action lawsuit filed in San Diego federal court alleges that retail giant Costco has engaged in false advertising regarding its popular Kirkland Signature Seasoned Rotisserie Chicken products, court documents show.

The legal action, initiated on January 22 by Escondido resident Anatasia Chernov and Big Bear resident Bianca Johnston, contends that Costco prominently displays “no preservatives” claims on both its website and in-store signage, despite the product containing sodium phosphate and carrageenan, substances the plaintiffs identify as preservatives.

According to the lawsuit, these ingredients directly contradict Costco’s marketing claims. The complaint further alleges that this misrepresentation has potentially cost consumers tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars collectively, as shoppers paid premium prices for products they believed were free from preservatives.

“Consumers reasonably rely on clear, prominent claims like ‘No Preservatives,’ especially when deciding what they and their families will eat,” stated Wesley M. Griffith, attorney for the plaintiffs. “Costco’s own ingredient list contradicts its marketing. That’s unlawful, and it’s unfair.”

The rotisserie chicken has been a cornerstone product for Costco for years, widely recognized for its $4.99 price point that has remained unchanged despite inflation. Industry analysts estimate that Costco sells approximately 100 million rotisserie chickens annually, making it one of the retailer’s most popular items and a significant driver of store traffic.

Food labeling disputes have increased across the retail grocery sector in recent years as consumers become more ingredient-conscious. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates food labeling claims, including preservative declarations, though interpretations of what constitutes a preservative can sometimes fall into regulatory gray areas.

Sodium phosphate is commonly used in meat products to retain moisture and improve texture, while carrageenan, derived from seaweed, serves as a thickening agent and stabilizer. Food scientists sometimes classify these ingredients as functional additives rather than preservatives, though they can extend shelf life as a secondary effect.

The plaintiffs claim they would not have purchased the product—or would have paid significantly less—had they known about the presence of these additives. Their lawsuit seeks class-action status, which would potentially allow thousands of other Costco customers to join the litigation.

This case represents part of a broader trend of consumer advocacy around food transparency. Similar lawsuits have targeted major food manufacturers and retailers over claims regarding “natural” ingredients, GMO content, and other marketing terminology that consumers increasingly scrutinize.

Costco has not yet publicly responded to the allegations. The company has built a strong reputation for quality control and customer satisfaction, with its Kirkland Signature private label enjoying high consumer trust. The membership-based retailer operates over 800 warehouses globally and generates approximately $200 billion in annual revenue.

Legal experts note that the outcome of this case could potentially influence how retailers market prepared food products and the specificity required in ingredient disclosures. Companies across the food industry will likely monitor this case closely, as it may establish precedents for how preservation-related claims must be substantiated.

The case has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. Court schedules indicate preliminary hearings will begin in the coming months, though complex consumer class actions typically proceed slowly through the legal system, often taking years to resolve.