28d ago in Open Class Actions
NEC Baby Formula Lawsuit Join Claim Today
Attention: Parents of Children with NEC
Certain baby formulas have been linked to necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC)
If your child developed necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) after consuming toxic baby formula, you may qualify for Significant Financial Compensation!
Was your child diagnosed with necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC)?
Did your child experience any of the following?
Select One *
What is your child's year of birth?
Year of Birth
YYYY
Was your child given formula or milk fortifier?
Was your child born premature?
Do you currently have a lawyer representing your claim?
Getting real about toxic baby formula: What you need to know about NEC
The joy of parenthood comes with a deep sense of responsibility, especially concerning our little ones' diet and health. Alarmingly, a serious condition known as necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) has been linked to certain baby formulas, creating widespread concern among parents.
What is necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC)?
NEC is not your average tummy trouble. It is a severe condition that inflames and can severely damage a baby's intestines, mainly in those who are not exclusively breastfed and consume formula derived from cow's milk. The condition is dangerous and can turn life-threatening if not addressed swiftly.
Identifying the baby formulas under scrutiny
As a new parent, you’ve likely heard about Similac and Enfamil. But here's something you might not know — these popular baby formulas are made from cow's milk and they could be linked to NEC in babies. This is especially important if your baby was born early.
Research, like Frontiers in Pediatrics’ 2022 animal study, shows us that not all formulas are created equal. They can affect your baby's tummy differently. Brands like Enfamil and Similac could have a higher chance of leading to NEC than breast milk does.
The study found that some formulas might be rougher on the tummy than others. For example, Similac Special Care, often used in hospitals for tiny babies to help them grow, was said to cause more tummy issues than another formula called NeoSure, which is for little ones who are already home from the hospital.
Have any baby formulas been recalled?
Yes, Abbott recalled several formulas in February 2022 following infections and again in October 2022 due to potential spoilage from improperly sealed bottles.
In February 2022, the first wave of recalls hit when Abbott pulled several of its formulas off the shelves. This action was a response to the tragic reports of infections caused by Cronobacter sakazakii bacteria, which led to the deaths of several infants. The formulas in question — Similac, Alimentum, and EleCare — were all traced back to the company’s Sturgis, Michigan, facility.
In response to this situation, Abbott temporarily shut down the Sturgis plant to investigate the source of contamination. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) stepped in for inspection and found traces of Cronobacter bacteria in various spots within the plant, although, thankfully, none was detected in the formula samples they tested. This recall was significant enough to contribute to a nationwide shortage of baby formula, putting even more stress on parents across the country. The plant has since reopened and resumed production.
In October 2022, Abbott was in the spotlight again for another recall, this time involving certain lots of its ready-to-feed liquid formulas. The problem? Some of the bottles might not have been sealed correctly. This misstep raised concerns about spoilage and the potential for stomach problems if the formula was consumed.
The brands affected in the October recall included a range of products designed to cater to different nutritional needs:
- Similac Pro-Total Comfort
- Similac 360 Total Care
- Similac 360 Total Care Sensitive
- Similac Special Care 24
- Similac Stage 1
- Similac NeoSure
- Similac water (sterilized)
- Pedialyte electrolyte solution
Recognizing the signs of NEC in your baby
Knowing what signs to look for can truly be a lifesaver when it comes to NEC. If you notice any of the following symptoms in your baby, it's critical to get medical help right away:
- Abdominal Pain: If your baby seems unusually uncomfortable or is crying more than usual, it could be a sign of pain in their belly.
- Lethargy: A sudden lack of energy or sleepiness more than usual can be a warning sign.
- Bloody Stool: This is a clear indicator something is not right with your baby's digestive system.
- Feeding Difficulties: If your baby is struggling to eat or suddenly refuses to eat, it could be a symptom.
- Swollen, Puffy Abdomen: An abdomen that looks or feels swollen can indicate inflammation or other problems inside.
- Changes in Vital Signs: Watch for unusual changes in blood pressure, breathing, and heart rate.
- Inability to Gain Weight: If your baby isn't gaining weight or is losing weight, it's a cause for concern.
- Unstable Body Temperature: Fluctuations in your baby's body temperature can be a symptom of NEC.
- Vomiting: Particularly if the vomit is yellow or green, it's a sign that your baby needs immediate medical attention.
In more severe cases or as NEC progresses, symptoms might include:
- Generalized Swelling or Fluid Retention: This can be a sign of worsening NEC.
- Low Blood Sodium Levels: An imbalance in electrolytes is a serious concern.
- Kidney Problems and Excessive Potassium in the Blood: These symptoms indicate that NEC is affecting more than just the intestines.
If you spot any of these signs, don't wait. Early intervention can make a significant difference in outcomes for babies with NEC.
What increases a baby's risk of NEC?
As a new parent, it's crucial to be aware of the conditions that could affect your little one's health. Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is a serious intestinal issue, particularly in premature infants. Let's break down what could increase your baby's risk of developing NEC:
- Premature Birth: Babies born before the 37th week of pregnancy are more susceptible to NEC.
- Low Birth Weight: Infants weighing less than 5.5 pounds face a higher risk.
- Cow's Milk-Based Formulas: Formula feeding, especially with products based on cow's milk, can elevate the risk.
- Underlying Illness or Infections: Babies dealing with serious illnesses or infections are at increased risk.
- Hospital Conditions: Certain conditions within the hospital environment, like bacterial outbreaks, can contribute to the risk.
- Blood Transfusions: There's evidence suggesting a link between transfusions and a heightened risk of NEC.
- Low Blood Oxygen Levels at Birth: Babies who experience low oxygen levels during delivery may have a higher chance of developing NEC.
It's important to note that while NEC is more common in premature infants, with about one in 1,000 affected, it's relatively rare in full-term babies, occurring in about one in 10,000 cases. Most instances of NEC develop while the baby is still hospitalized.
There's a silver lining, though. Feeding premature babies with mother's milk or human milk from a donor may significantly reduce the risk of NEC. This emphasizes the protective benefits of breast milk and the importance of discussing feeding options with your healthcare provider, especially if your baby is at a higher risk for NEC.
Taking action against toxic baby formula
Discovering that your baby has developed NEC due to certain baby formulas can be heartbreaking. Knowing that there are legal avenues to pursue can offer a sense of direction during this challenging time. Many parents, faced with the daunting reality that their premature babies developed NEC after consuming formula brands like Enfamil or Similac, are taking legal action. Here's a closer look at the steps being taken:
- Filing Lawsuits: Parents are filing lawsuits against formula manufacturers, specifically Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson, the companies behind Enfamil and Similac.
- Seeking Justice: The lawsuits allege that these companies were aware, or should have been aware, of the risks associated with cow's milk-based formulas for preterm infants. Despite this knowledge, they continued to market and sell their products.
- Demanding Transparency and Safety: These legal actions aim not only for compensation but also to push for greater transparency about the potential risks of these formulas and improve safety standards in infant nutrition.
The core of these lawsuits is the claim that the manufacturers failed to adequately warn both parents and healthcare providers about the risk of NEC linked to their cow's milk-based baby formulas. By pursuing legal action, affected families seek to hold these companies accountable and prevent similar incidents from happening to others.
If your child developed necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) after consuming toxic baby formula, you may be entitled to compensation. Fill out the form on this page for more information.
Mass torts vs. class actions at a glance
When we're talking about mass tort and class action lawsuits, we're discussing two distinct legal approaches used to handle claims where many individuals are harmed by the same entity or event.
Mass tort lawsuits are a way to handle legal cases where many individuals have been harmed, but each person's situation is distinct. Think of it like a neighborhood where every house has different damage after a storm. In a mass tort, each homeowner would file their own lawsuit, but because the storm is the common factor, the court groups the lawsuits together to manage them more efficiently. The key here is that each person retains their own case and has a say in how it's settled, which reflects their unique damages.
In contrast, class action lawsuits bring people together under a single legal action. It's as if the whole neighborhood decided to sue the storm together, with one or a few neighbors representing everyone's interests. Here, individual control is limited. The representative, known as the lead plaintiff, along with their legal team, makes decisions that affect the entire group. When it comes to the payout, it's typically split evenly, or based on a formula that applies to all members.
What's best for you?
Let's quickly sum up the main points to help you decide which legal route could work better for your situation:
- Control: More personal control in mass torts; limited control in class actions.
- Compensation: Individualized in mass torts; uniform in class actions.
- Applicability: Mass torts fit for varied individual damages; class actions for uniform damages across the group.
- Efficiency: Class actions can be quicker and use fewer resources by combining claims.
So, if you're part of a group that's been wronged and you're thinking about legal action, consider these points. Do you need to maintain control over your case, or are you okay with a representative taking the lead? Do your damages require individual attention, or are they similar enough to others to share in a collective claim? Your answers will help determine whether a mass tort or a class action is the best route for your situation.
Key Differences Between Mass Tort and Class Action Lawsuits
Structure:
- Mass Tort: Involves multiple individual lawsuits grouped together due to common elements or defendants.
- Class Action Lawsuits: A single lawsuit brought on behalf of a larger group, known as the class, with a designated representative plaintiff.
Individual Control:
- Mass Tort: Each plaintiff maintains control over their case and its resolution.
- Class Action Lawsuits: Class members have limited control over the lawsuit, with decisions made by the representative plaintiff and their legal team.
Compensation:
- Mass Tort: Compensation and settlements are determined individually, considering the unique circumstances and harm suffered by each plaintiff.
- Class Action Lawsuits: Compensation and settlements are typically distributed uniformly among all class members, often on a pro-rata basis.
Applicability:
- Mass Tort: Ideal when cases involve varying degrees of harm or distinct circumstances for each plaintiff.
- Class Action Lawsuits: Effective when numerous claimants have similar claims and a uniform resolution is practical.
Efficiency:
- Mass Tort: May be more time-consuming and complex due to individual case management.
- Class Action Lawsuits: Generally more efficient in terms of time and resources as it consolidates claims into one proceeding.
Understanding these differences is crucial for both plaintiffs and defendants when determining the most appropriate legal strategy for addressing a collective grievance or harm.
Baby Formula NEC Class Action Lawsuit Updates: October
October 2, 2024
- Third NEC Trial Underway in Missouri: A Missouri mother's lawsuit against two major formula manufacturers and a hospital is underway, marking the third trial in a series of cases alleging that cow's milk-based formulas caused necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants. This trial, which began yesterday, is the first to involve both Abbott and Reckitt as defendants and the first to include a hospital - St. Louis Children's Hospital. The plaintiff's attorney argued that the companies were aware of the risks of feeding their formulas to vulnerable infants but failed to adequately warn parents or healthcare providers. The outcome of this trial could significantly impact the nearly 1,000 similar cases pending in courts across the country.
October 1, 2024
- MDL Case Count Grows: The NEC infant formula class action MDL added 27 new cases in September, bringing the total to 598. Following two recent substantial verdicts, an increase in new filings is anticipated.
September 30, 2024
- Trial Dates Expected: Lawyers are expected to submit proposed trial dates for the MDL by Friday.
September 23, 2024:
- NIH-Funded Study Strengthens Link Between Formula and NEC: A recent study funded by the National Institutes of Health and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association has found that extremely preterm infants fed donated human milk had a significantly lower incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) compared to those fed formula. This finding adds substantial weight to claims made in NEC baby formula litigation, emphasizing the heightened risk of NEC associated with formula feeding in this vulnerable population.
September 10, 2024:
- Tort Reform Lobbyists Criticize NEC Baby Formula Verdicts: Tort reform advocates are voicing strong disapproval of the recent substantial verdicts in NEC baby formula cases. A Missouri jury awarded a staggering $95 million in compensatory damages and $400 million in punitive damages, while a similar case in Illinois resulted in a $60 million verdict against Mead Johnson in March.
September 5, 2024:
- Infant Formula NEC MDL Grows: The infant formula NEC class action MDL saw an increase of 33 new cases during August, bringing the total number of pending cases to 571.
September 3, 2024:
- Agreement on Bellwether Trial Order: The parties in the NEC baby formula litigation have reached an agreement on the order of the first four bellwether trials. The proposed order is:
- Mar v. Abbott Laboratories (Case No. 1:22-cv-00232)Diggs v. Abbott Laboratories (Case No. 1:22-cv-05356)Etienne & Brown v. Abbott Laboratories (Case No. 1:22-cv-02001)Inman v. Mead Johnson & Co. (Case No. 1:22-cv-03737)
This agreement, pending the resolution of dispositive motions and with the parties reserving the right to seek summary judgment, replaces the previously planned submission of competing position papers. Additionally, the parties have requested that the August 29, 2024, Status Conference be conducted remotely.
August 19, 2024:
- Philadelphia Emerges as New Battleground for NEC Baby Formula Litigation: Following a $495 million verdict in St. Louis, Philadelphia is set to become a new focal point for NEC baby formula lawsuits. Unlike the MDL, where cases are consolidated, Philadelphia's court system handles each lawsuit individually. Plaintiffs' lawyers are employing a unique strategy in Philadelphia, suing both formula manufacturers and hospitals, potentially complicating defense strategies and leading hospitals to shift blame towards manufacturers for inadequate warnings. The first trial in Philadelphia addressing NEC-related injuries is expected to start in Spring 2025.
August 12, 2024:
- NEC Lawsuit Transfer to MDL Initiated:Mead Johnson has initiated a legal move to transfer a NEC lawsuit from state to federal court. The case, filed on August 9, 2024, alleges that the company's infant formula caused NEC in a premature Virginia infant, leading to her death. The company is seeking to consolidate this case with other similar lawsuits in a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL). Mead Johnson argues that the complexity of these legal matters warrants a centralized federal court for handling them.
August 1, 2024:
- NEC Lawsuits See Minor Increase: The Abbott Laboratories/Mead Johnson Preterm Infant Nutrition Products MDL experienced a slight increase in active cases, growing from 534 in July to 538 in August 2024.
July 31, 2024:
- Court Grants Depositions in NEC MDL: The court granted plaintiffs' lawyers permission to depose five individuals, including Dan Achimov, Brian Berg, Craig Hadley, Daniel Secada, and Justin Wells, by August 20, 2024. These individuals hold key positions within Abbott and Mead Johnson and are expected to provide valuable insights into the companies' infant formula products, research, regulatory compliance, and marketing practices.
July 26, 2024:
- $495 Million Verdict in NEC Baby Formula Trial Against Abbott: A St. Louis jury awarded $495 million to the family of a premature infant who developed necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) after consuming Abbott Laboratories' Similac or Enfamil cow's milk-based formula. This landmark verdict in the closely watched bellwether trial could significantly impact the numerous other NEC lawsuits pending in state and federal courts across the U.S.
July 19, 2024:
- Abbott Considers Withdrawing Premature Infant Formula: Abbott Laboratories CEO Robert Ford announces the company is contemplating removing its premature infant formula from the market due to legal and safety concerns. Ford called on public health officials to take action, emphasizing the formula's importance for neonatal intensive care units and criticizing the lawsuits as lacking merit and scientific support.
July 11, 2024:
- First Trial Against Abbott for NEC Begins: A bellwether trial against Abbott Laboratories begins in Missouri, with the plaintiff alleging that Abbott's cow's milk-based Similac formula caused necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in her premature daughter and that the company failed to warn of the formula's risks. This trial follows a similar case resulting in a $60 million verdict against Mead Johnson for Enfamil-related NEC, and could significantly influence future settlement amounts in the litigation.
July 2024:
- 534 NEC Baby Formula Lawsuits Pending: As of July 2024, there are 534 necrotizing enterocolitis baby formula lawsuits pending in multidistrict litigation (MDL 3026) before U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer in the Northern District of Illinois.
June 28, 2024:
- New NEC Lawsuit Filed in Colorado: A new NEC lawsuit is filed alleging that a prematurely born infant in Denver developed severe health complications after being fed cow's milk-based Enfamil products. The lawsuit claims the infant developed NEC, leading to long-term health issues and financial losses, and that the parents were not informed of the risks associated with feeding cow's milk-based products to preterm infants.
June 25, 2024:
- Judge Pallmeyer Considers Additional Discovery: At a status conference, Judge Pallmeyer considers the plaintiffs' request for additional discovery in the NEC baby formula MDL. The court expresses a willingness to grant the motion, requesting further details on the additional witnesses, deposition topics, and justification for their inclusion. Another status hearing is scheduled for August 29, 2024.
June 24, 2024:
- Bellwether Trial Scheduled for May 2025: Judge Pallmeyer issues a scheduling order, setting the first bellwether test trial for May 2025. The order outlines timelines for fact discovery, expert depositions, and pre-trial motions. This trial follows a $60 million verdict in a similar Illinois state court case, potentially signaling a favorable outcome for plaintiffs in the MDL.
June 6, 2024:
- Fact Discovery Deadline Extended: Judge Pallmeyer further extends the deadline for completing fact discovery to August 9, 2024. The updated schedule includes expert depositions from November 4, 2024, to January 10, 2025, and motions for summary judgment and Daubert challenges due by January 24, 2025. The first trial is now set for May 5, 2025.
June 2024:
- Status of MDL: As of June 6th, 514 NEC baby formula lawsuits are pending in the multidistrict litigation (MDL 3026). The litigation is still in its early stages with no settlements or verdicts reached yet.
2024 Overview:
- New Rules for Evidence: A May court order requires plaintiffs to provide specific evidence, such as hospital records or subpoenas, to link the infant's injury to a specific brand of formula. This aims to streamline the litigation and ensure only valid claims proceed.
- $60 Million Jury Verdict: In March, a $60 million jury verdict was awarded in the first trial holding formula manufacturers accountable for necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants. The jury found that Mead Johnson's Enfamil formula caused the death of an infant, setting a precedent for future litigation.
- Discovery Deadline Extended: In February, Judge Pallmeyer extended the deadline for completing general fact discovery for potential bellwether trials in the infant formula litigation from April 15 to June 28, following a request by the plaintiffs. This extension aims to allow sufficient time for thorough investigation and preparation for these initial cases.
0
0 comments
NEC Baby Formula Lawsuit Join Claim Today
skool.com/class-action-lawsuits
Looking to join a class action lawsuit? Your trusted resource for finding class action settlements and helping you get what you are owed.
powered by