Federal Circuit Puts People Before Profits In Reversing Huge Verdict For Tainted Egg Producer

Today, in a victory for public health and safety, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a lower court’s ruling that the U.S. must compensate egg producer Rose Acre Farms, Inc $5.4 million for profits lost after the government temporarily restricted sales of Rose Acres’ eggs due to salmonella contamination.

As we reported back in December, in 2006 the U.S. Court of Federal Claims determined that the Department of Agriculture’s regulations restricting interstate sale and transportation of contaminated eggs produced at three of Rose Acres’ farms constituted an unconstitutional taking under the Fifth Amendment. The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment provides that private property shall not “be taken for public use, without just compensation.” In considering whether there was a compensable taking following restriction of the sale of Rose Acre’s contaminated eggs, the lower court concluded that “[o]n balance, plaintiff’s severe economic loss and reasonable investment expectation outweigh government’s attempt to prevent the spread of salmonella,” awarding Rose Acre $5.4 million plus interest and legal fees.

CAC’s predecessor organization, Community Rights Counsel, filed an amicus brief in support of the government’s appeal of the ruling, in which we argued that “limitations on the sale of commercial goods to protect the public generally do not give rise to takings liability, notwithstanding their impact on value or profits.” Fortunately, the appeals court agreed in this case, and repudiated Rose Acre’s profit-based takings analysis, calling the court’s previous suggestion that loss of profits might be an appropriate measure “unfortunate dicta.”

Even if a loss of profits analysis were ever appropriate, the Federal Circuit agreed with our argument that Rose Acre’s “mere 10.6 percent loss cannot plausibly be viewed as a taking.” The Court held that “although the monetary loss to Rose Acre was not insignificant, it did not even approach the level of severe economic harm and thus does not strongly favor Rose Acre.”

CAC is delighted with the outcome of this case, which, in light of the recent discovery of salmonella in a major peanut processing plant, is a timely affirmation of the government’s ability to protect public health and safety against potentially harmful commercial goods. Moreover, the appeals court’s opinion corrects the lower court’s incorrect application of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, meaning today’s ruling is also a victory for those seeking a faithful adherence to the Constitution.

More from

Access to Justice
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

NAACP v. xAI

In NAACP v. xAI, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit considered whether the federal government can block people harmed by the operation of a massive power plant near their homes from...
Rule of Law
October 15, 2026

October 2026 Newsletter: In a New Supreme Court Term, CAC Defends the Environment, Workers’ Rights, and Civil Rights

There’s a litigant that the Roberts Court likes even more than Donald Trump: big business....
Criminal Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Hayat v. Diaz

In Hayat v. Diaz, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is considering whether police officers may forcibly enter homes without a warrant based only on “reasonable suspicion” of a crime.
Rule of Law
October 6, 2026

Supreme Court’s Alito Will Stay Even If Democrats Win Senate

Bloomberg
CAC Chief Counsel Brianne Gorod spoke to Bloomberg Law about Justice Alito’s reliable support for...
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Williams v. Huner

In Williams v. Huner, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is considering whether a Pennsylvania prison’s failure to provide a prisoner with rigid neck and wrist braces and effective pain medication violated...
Environmental Protection
October 5, 2026

CAC Release: To Escape Financial Liability for Global Warming Harms, Oil and Gas Companies Present Supreme Court with a Result in Search of a Rationale

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Suncor Energy...
By: Brian R. Frazelle