Grocery Outlet "Elsewhere" Prices: Are Shoppers Being Duped?

Case Overview: A class action lawsuit alleges Grocery Outlet Inc. and its affiliated Oregon stores used inflated or fabricated "elsewhere" prices to mislead shoppers, violating Oregon's Unlawful Trade Practices Act.

Consumers Affected: Oregon consumers who purchased items from Grocery Outlet Inc. stores.

Court: Circuit Court of the State of Oregon in and for the County of Multnomah

A new lawsuit accuses Grocery Outlet Inc. and more than 60 affiliated stores across Oregon of running a coordinated scheme to mislead shoppers with bogus discounts. 

The complaint, filed by three Oregon consumers, claims the stores used inflated or completely made-up “elsewhere” prices on their tags—prices that were meant to look like competitors’ but came without sources or context, allegedly in violation of Oregon law.

According to the lawsuit, the strategy made it appear that customers were scoring major deals, when in reality, they were often paying just as much or even more than they would have at nearby stores. 

The practice, the lawsuit claims, runs afoul of Oregon’s Unlawful Trade Practices Act, which bans misleading advertising and requires transparency when retailers compare their prices to others’.

Oregon Shoppers Question "Elsewhere" Pricing Claims

The three plaintiffs—Roger Sullivan, Schearon Stewart, and John Franz—say they each shopped at different Oregon Grocery Outlet stores in May and came away thinking they had saved big. But when they cross-checked prices with other local retailers, the supposed “elsewhere” savings didn’t hold up.

For example, Sullivan bought oat milk for $3.19 in Salem, listed as marked down from an “elsewhere” price of $4.99. But that same item was going for just $1.99 at Fred Meyer. 

Stewart ran into similar issues in King City, where DiGiorno pizza advertised at $5.99 was supposedly discounted from $8.99, except Fred Meyer had it for $3.99. In St. Johns, Franz paid $4.99 for pizza rolls marked down from $8.99, while Fred Meyer’s price was $3.49.

In many cases, the lawsuit alleges, the referenced “elsewhere” prices weren’t just misleading—they were impossible. Some items weren’t sold by any other stores in the region, making it unlawful to imply a local competitor’s pricing. Others had no identifiable competitor at all, and in every instance, the source of the price comparison was not disclosed.

Lawsuit Alleges Discount Scheme Violates State Law

Grocery Outlet’s business model is based on buying overstock and closeout items in bulk and reselling them at what it calls deeply discounted prices. The company claims this “opportunistic” approach helps customers, especially low-income shoppers, stretch their budgets and reduces food waste, the lawsuit states.

But the lawsuit argues that the supposed savings are often smoke and mirrors. Plaintiffs say the stores consistently use “elsewhere” prices that either don’t exist or are exaggerated, and weekly ads compound the problem by making broad claims like “Save up to 46%,” calculated off those same fictitious numbers. 

That, according to the suit, violates another state rule requiring advertised discounts to be based on a store’s own previous prices, not someone else’s, real or fake.

Retailers Face Growing Legal Pushback on False Sales

This lawsuit joins a broader wave of legal action against retailers accused of using fake or inflated discounts to drive sales. Helzberg Diamonds is currently being sued for running “limited-time” sales that were allegedly always available. 

Skin-care brand Nood has also been hit with a class action over allegedly bogus markdowns. Other major retailers like Macy’s, Hobby Lobby, and Sunglass Hut have faced similar complaints.

The Oregon case argues that Grocery Outlet’s pricing strategy isn’t just misleading—it’s calculated, widespread, and targeted at shoppers who can least afford to be duped.

In their lawsuit, the consumers want to represent anyone in Oregon who purchased anything from a Grocery Outlet Inc. store over the past year. They are suing for violations of Unlawful Trade Practices Act and are seeking injunctive relief, damages, fees, costs, and interest.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Stewart, et al. v. 2SGR Ventures, LLC DBA Hermiston Grocery Outlet, et al.
• Case Number: 25CV33779
• Court: Circuit Court of the State of Oregon in and for the County of Multnomah 

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• Tim Alan Quenelle (TIM QUENELLE, PC)
• F. Peter Silva II, Hassan Zavareei, and Allison Parr (Tycko & Zavareei LLP)
• Matthew Kirkpatrick and Robert Le (Oregon Consumer Justice Law, P.C.)

Have you shopped at Grocery Outlet in Oregon? What are your thoughts on their 'elsewhere' pricing? Share your experience below.