Defendants in NEC Baby Formula Lawsuit Seek Case Dismissal
The companies facing lawsuits in the NEC baby formula multidistrict litigation have filed a motion for summary judgment. Their primary argument is that the plaintiffs have not provided admissible expert testimony proving that cow’s milk-based infant formula leads to necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants. The defense strategy heavily relies on challenging the credibility of the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, Dr. Logan Spector and Dr. Jennifer Sucre, under Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. If the motion is granted, it would remove key testimony on general causation, which the defense claims is critical to the case—potentially resulting in the dismissal of all claims. However, this outcome appears unlikely.
The motion presents an argument that downplays the basis of the lawsuits, seemingly ignoring past rulings where juries and judges have held formula manufacturers accountable. Notably, in March 2024, a jury in St. Clair County, Illinois, awarded $60 million to the family of a premature infant who developed NEC after consuming cow’s milk-based formula. Just a few months later, in July 2024, a Missouri jury delivered a $495 million verdict against Abbott Laboratories, finding their Similac formula contributed to an NEC diagnosis. The defense’s motion does not acknowledge these substantial verdicts.
Their argument leans on a report from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Working Group, which suggests that NEC is linked more to the absence of human milk rather than direct exposure to formula. Additionally, the defense references a joint statement from the FDA, CDC, and NIH, which concluded that no definitive evidence links preterm infant formula to NEC.
However, citing selective studies does not automatically entitle the defendants to summary judgment. Plaintiffs are expected to counter this motion by presenting extensive research and internal company records that indicate formula manufacturers were aware of potential risks for years yet failed to provide proper warnings to healthcare providers and parents. If granted, this motion would effectively end all cases within the multidistrict litigation. However, given the history of major jury verdicts in similar cases, such an outcome appears far from certain.
