Just weeks after a Missouri appeals court upheld a $495 million verdict against Abbott Laboratories, the legal landscape surrounding preterm baby formula lawsuits over necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) has shifted again.
In June, appellate courts issued two significant rulings involving lawsuits against Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson, the manufacturers of Similac and Enfamil. While one decision ordered a new trial in a case against Mead Johnson, the other left intact the largest verdict in the ongoing preterm infant formula litigation.
These rulings are a reminder that although families have won substantial jury verdicts in several NEC preterm infant formula cases, the appellate process remains an important part of the litigation.
Illinois Court Orders New Trial in $60 Million Enfamil Case
On June 12, the Illinois Fifth District Appellate Court reversed a $60 million jury verdict against Mead Johnson and ordered a new trial in a lawsuit brought by the mother of a premature infant who died after developing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC).
The original verdict, returned in 2024, was one of the first major plaintiff victories in the NEC baby formula litigation.
Rather than deciding whether Enfamil caused the infant's injuries, the appeals court focused on how the jury was instructed during trial.
According to the court, the jury should have been told that any duty to warn about the product's risks was owed to the treating physician, not directly to the child's mother. Because the jury instructions didn’t accurately reflect that legal standard, the court concluded the verdict couldn’t stand and sent the case back for a new trial.
The decision does not mean Mead Johnson has been cleared of liability. Instead, it means the case will likely be tried again unless the ruling is overturned or reviewed by the Illinois Supreme Court. Attorneys for the family have indicated they are considering additional appellate options while also preparing for a possible retrial.
Missouri Court Declines to Transfer Abbott Appeal
Only days later, another appellate development favored families pursuing claims against Abbott. The Missouri Court of Appeals declined Abbott's request to transfer its appeal of a $495 million verdict to the Missouri Supreme Court.
That verdict, awarded in 2024, remains one of the largest judgments in the NEC preterm baby formula litigation. Earlier this year, the Missouri Court of Appeals upheld the jury's decision after rejecting Abbott's arguments that legal errors required a new trial.
Abbott has stated it plans to ask the Missouri Supreme Court directly to review the case, meaning additional appellate proceedings could still occur. For now, however, the appellate court's decision leaves the judgment in place.
Different Outcomes, Different Legal Issues
At first glance, the two decisions may appear contradictory. One company received a new trial, while another continues to face one of the largest verdicts in the litigation. The difference is that the courts were addressing different legal questions.
In Illinois, the appellate court concluded the jury was improperly instructed on the law governing a manufacturer's duty to warn.
In Missouri, the appellate court found no reversible errors warranting reversal of the jury's verdict against Abbott.
Neither ruling resolves the scientific debate at the center of these NEC lawsuits.
Families bringing NEC claims allege manufacturers failed to adequately warn healthcare providers that premature infants fed cow's milk-based formulas face a greater risk of developing necrotizing enterocolitis than infants receiving human milk. Abbott and Mead Johnson continue to deny that their products cause NEC, maintaining that current scientific evidence shows breast milk is protective rather than formula being the cause of the disease.
What These Decisions Mean for NEC Baby Formula Lawsuits
The recent appellate rulings highlight an important reality about mass tort litigation: even after a jury reaches a verdict, the legal process often continues through appeals.
For families following the NEC baby formula litigation, these decisions don’t signal that the lawsuits are ending. Instead, they demonstrate how appellate courts shape the legal standards that future cases will follow.
Nearly 1,000 lawsuits remain pending against Abbott and Mead Johnson in state and federal courts across the country, with additional trials expected as the litigation continues.
As more appellate courts weigh in, their decisions could influence how future NEC baby formula claims are tried and how manufacturers defend these cases.
The attorneys at Childers, Schlueter & Smith (CSS) continue to follow significant developments involving NEC preterm infant formula lawsuits nationwide.
If your premature baby developed necrotizing enterocolitis after receiving cow's milk-based formula in a neonatal intensive care unit and you have questions about your legal options, learning more about the ongoing litigation may help you better understand your rights. Families seeking answers can contact CSS online, via live chat, or by calling 1-800-641-0098 for more information.
