Baby Formula Lawsuit: Fight for Justice and Compensation
File your baby formula lawsuit today and seek compensation for NEC-related injuries caused by infant formula. Free consultation with experienced lawyers.
NEC Baby Formula Lawsuits → ACT NOW! ←NEC Baby Formula Lawsuits → ACT NOW! ←
Families across the country are fighting back and receiving substantial compensation for the harm caused to their infants.
Are you the parent of a premature baby who developed necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) after being fed Enfamil™ or Similac® formula? Our legal team is aggressively pursuing cases in all 50 states, and the evidence shows that the cow milk in these formulas may have contributed to your child’s devastating condition.
TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE –
Don’t let your rights slip away.
The NEC baby formula lawsuit is a legal action taken by families whose infants developed this life-threatening condition after consuming certain baby formulas. NEC (Necrotizing Enterocolitis) is a serious intestinal disease that has been linked to formula feeding, particularly in premature infants.
Many lawsuits have been filed against formula manufacturers, stating that their products caused or contributed to NEC. If your child has been affected by NEC, our experienced attorneys are here to help. We provide expert legal guidance and work tirelessly to help you get the compensation your family deserves.
Contact us today for a free consultation.
What is NEC?
Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC) is a severe and potentially life-threatening condition that affects the intestines of premature infants. It occurs when portions of the bowel become inflamed and begin to break down, leading to infection and tissue death. NEC can cause severe complications, including infection, perforation of the intestines, and long-term digestive issues.
While the exact cause of NEC is not fully understood, research has shown a strong connection between formula feeding. Early detection and treatment are crucial, but NEC can have lasting impacts on a child’s health which makes it critical for parents to understand the risks and seek medical advice.
What is the Connection Between NEC and Baby Formula?
Studies have shown a concerning connection between the use of certain baby formulas and the development of Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants. NEC is most commonly seen in babies born before 32 weeks gestation, whose underdeveloped digestive systems are more vulnerable. Research shows that formula feeding, especially with cow’s milk-based formulas, may increase the risk of NEC in these infants.
Breast milk contains natural nutrients and antibodies that help protect the infant’s digestive system, while formula lacks these protective components. This difference may contribute to the higher frequency of NEC in formula-fed babies.
As a result, families whose children have developed NEC after being fed formula are filing these baby formula lawsuits against manufacturers. They are stating that manufacturers failed to warn about the risks associated with their products.
Types of Baby Formula Involved in the Lawsuit
Several well-known baby formula brands have been linked to increased risks of NEC in premature infants that are sparking numerous lawsuits. The main brands involved in these lawsuits include:
- Enfamil: A widely used formula that has been the subject of many NEC-related lawsuits, with families alleging the formula’s cow’s milk content contributed to their child’s condition.
- Similac: Another major brand implicated in these lawsuits, with similar claims regarding the risks associated with its use in premature infants.
- Other Cow’s Milk-Based Formulas: In addition to Enfamil and Similac, several other formulas containing cow’s milk proteins have been named in lawsuits, as studies suggest these may increase the likelihood of NEC.
These NEC infant formula lawsuits argue that formula manufacturers failed to properly warn parents and healthcare providers about the potential risks of feeding these formulas to premature babies. Families are asking for justice for the harm caused to their infants and attempt to raise awareness about the dangers of certain baby formulas.
How Does NEC Affect Families?
The impact of Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC) on families can be devastating, both emotionally and financially. When an infant is diagnosed with NEC, it often leads to immediate and aggressive medical intervention. It includes surgery, extended hospital stays, and intensive care.
For parents, watching their newborn undergo such serious treatments is traumatic, as many infants face long-term health challenges. It can be anything such as digestive issues, growth delays, and developmental disabilities.
Beyond the physical toll on the child, NEC can place an immense strain on families. The costs of medical care can quickly mount. The emotional burden is equally heavy, as parents struggle with the uncertainty of their child’s prognosis and the future.
In some tragic cases, NEC may lead to long-term disabilities or even death, leaving families to cope with the heartbreaking loss or lifelong care needs.
What Are the Signs That Your Child May Have Suffered from NEC Due to Formula?
If your infant was fed formula, especially as a premature baby, and is showing any of the following symptoms, they may have developed Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC). It’s crucial to be aware of these signs and seek immediate medical attention if you suspect your child is affected:
- Abdominal Distension
- Feeding Intolerance
- Blood in Stool
- Temperature Instability
- Lethargy or Weakness
- Abnormal Breathing Patterns
- Signs of Infection
If your child’s condition was caused by formula feeding, hire a NEC baby formula lawsuit attorney who can help you understand your legal options.
How Are NEC Lawsuits Handled?
NEC formula lawsuits are typically handled through a legal process that involves several important steps. It includes:
- The first step in handling an NEC lawsuit is consulting with an experienced attorney. During this consultation, your lawyer will review the details of your case and determine whether you have a valid claim.
- If you decide to move forward with the lawsuit, your attorney will begin gathering evidence to support your case.
- Once sufficient evidence is collected, your lawyer will file the lawsuit on your behalf, alleging that their product contributed to your child’s NEC diagnosis.
- After filing, the discovery process begins. Both sides exchange information and evidence to prepare for trial.
- In many NEC lawsuits, settlement negotiations take place before the case reaches trial. The formula manufacturer may offer a financial settlement in exchange for dropping the lawsuit.
NEC Class Action Lawsuit Status Latest Updates
February 11, 2025 – Motion for Summary Judgment in the MDL
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.
January 26, 2025 – Motion to Exclude Expert
Abbott Laboratories and other defendants in the Preterm Infant Nutrition MDL have filed a motion to exclude Dr. Jennifer Sucre, a highly esteemed neonatologist, from testifying about the connection between formula feeding and necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in preterm infants.
Dr. Sucre is a distinguished expert in neonatal medicine. As a nationally recognized neonatologist and physician-scientist at Vanderbilt University, her pioneering research bridges clinical care with advanced scientific discoveries to enhance outcomes for premature infants. With extensive expertise in cellular biology and preterm infant health, her peer-reviewed work has significantly contributed to the field of neonatal medicine, earning her a reputation as a leading authority.
Despite her impressive qualifications, the defendants argue that Dr. Sucre is unfit to testify, claiming her focus on lung development undermines her ability to speak on NEC. They also challenge her reliance on animal and in vitro studies, disregarding the ethical and logistical constraints of conducting human trials on such a vulnerable population. Their intent is clear: discredit a credible expert to weaken the plaintiffs’ case and minimize their own liability.
It’s no surprise the defendants are attempting to exclude Dr. Sucre before trial. Her testimony would be both compelling and detrimental to their defense, which is precisely why they want to prevent the jury from hearing it.
January 24, 2025: Joint Status Report
The Joint Status Report submitted today in the MDL presents an organized pretrial briefing schedule, mutually agreed upon by both parties, to efficiently address Rule 702 motions concerning expert witness testimony and dispositive motions. This approach aims to streamline proceedings by focusing on key issues while postponing certain case-specific motions to trial-specific timelines. Meanwhile, general causation motions and selected expert challenges will move forward.
Key aspects include a phased schedule for briefing motions related to both general and case-specific experts, predefined page limits for filings, and a structured process to handle disputes over supplemental reports and depositions. Additionally, the parties have established deadlines for motions in limine and the final pretrial conference for the first bellwether trial, ensuring coordinated efforts to prevent scheduling conflicts as the litigation advances. The trial for the Mar case is scheduled to commence on May 5, 2025.
Get the Justice Your Family Deserves
If your child has been affected by Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC) due to baby formula, our experienced attorneys are here to help you understand your legal options.
