Washington families to receive millions in settlement from chicken price-fixing scandal

SEATTLE — Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson announced Monday the resolution of his antitrust lawsuit against the last three defendants in a major chicken price-fixing conspiracy.

The final defendants—House of Raeford Farms, Wayne-Sanderson Farms, and Foster Farms—will pay $2.2 million, pending court approval.

This brings the total recovered in Ferguson’s broiler chicken price-fixing case, involving 19 defendants, to $37.7 million.

“These corporations cheated to increase profits, harming families in the process,” Ferguson said. “We aimed to hold these corporations accountable, level the playing field, and return money to Washingtonians.”

In December 2023, Ferguson revealed that $35.5 million from this case and $5.1 million from a similar tuna price-fixing case would be returned to affected consumers.

Following a claims process that closed on June 5, approximately $30 million has been distributed to Washington residents, with the remaining claims being processed.

The remaining funds will support future antitrust work, including the challenge of the proposed Kroger and Albertsons merger.

The Attorney General’s Antitrust Division is funded entirely by successful case outcomes.

In December 2023, Ferguson’s office began mailing checks to Washingtonians as restitution for the chicken and tuna price-fixing cases.

The office distributed $35.5 million from the chicken producers’ lawsuit and $5.1 million from the tuna lawsuits—$40.6 million in total.

Initial checks of $50 or $120 were sent to households with incomes at or below 175% of the federal poverty level, with additional restitution available through a claims process.

As of July 4, 274,595 households cashed the initial checks, totaling approximately $27 million. Ferguson’s office sent out 28,530 additional claims checks, with 15,709 cashed so far, amounting to $1,591,860.

The claims deadline passed on June 5, and the program administrator continues to verify additional claims.

Comments on this article