Verdict and next steps
A jury in Chicago returned a verdict on Thursday finding that Abbott Laboratories should pay $53 million in compensatory damages to a group of families who alleged the company did not adequately warn that its formula for premature infants can be linked to necrotizing enterocolitis, or NEC. The trial took place in Cook County circuit court, where four families had their cases consolidated for trial.
The jurors will reconvene on Friday to decide whether Abbott should face punitive damages and, if so, how large those awards should be, according to local court reporting.
Company response and positions in litigation
An Abbott spokesperson did not immediately provide a comment on the jury's decision, according to reporting. Abbott has consistently denied that its preterm formulas cause NEC, and the company maintains that these specialty products are essential for premature babies when mothers are unable to provide sufficient breast milk.
About NEC and the plaintiffs
Necrotizing enterocolitis causes the death of bowel tissue and predominantly affects premature newborns. The condition carries an estimated mortality rate of more than 20 percent. The lawsuits in this consolidated trial relate to children born in Chicago-area hospitals between 2012 and 2019 who developed NEC and survived. Court filings state that three of the children required surgery and that all continue to live with ongoing health problems.
Scope of litigation and products at issue
Nearly 1,000 lawsuits have been filed against Abbott, the maker of Similac preterm products, and against Mead Johnson, the maker of Enfamil and a unit of Reckitt. More than 700 of these cases are centralized in an Illinois federal court. Additional suits are pending in state courts in Illinois, Missouri and Pennsylvania.
The litigation centers on cow's milk-based formulas and supplemental products designed to fortify mothers' milk in hospital settings for preterm infants. The filings distinguish these hospital-grade products from ordinary retail infant formulas sold in stores.
Industry and regulatory context cited in filings
Both Abbott and Mead Johnson have argued that while breast milk provides protection against NEC, their formulas do not cause the condition, and that clinicians have long recognized the benefits of breast milk. In 2024, Abbott's CEO Robert Ford warned publicly that the litigation could put availability of the preterm products at risk.
Also in 2024, a joint report by U.S. regulatory agencies and a working group of scientists convened by the National Institutes of Health concluded that current evidence supports the hypothesis that it is the absence of breast milk rather than exposure to formula that is associated with a higher incidence of NEC.
Mixed results in other trials
Outcomes so far in related trials have varied. In 2024, a jury in St. Clair County, Illinois ordered Mead Johnson to pay $60 million to the mother of a premature infant who died after being fed Enfamil. That same year, a St. Louis jury ordered Abbott to pay $495 million in another case. Both of those verdicts have been appealed.
The American Academy of Pediatrics filed a brief supporting Mead Johnson in its appeal, stating that formula is part of the standard of care for premature babies.
Abbott and Mead Johnson won a Missouri state-court trial in October 2024, but the judge in that case later ordered a new trial after finding improper conduct by defense counsel; that ruling is on appeal. In March, a Florida state judge dismissed a NEC case that had been scheduled for trial after finding that an additional warning to the family's physicians would not have altered their decision to use the formula.
Status of federal multidistrict litigation
No cases in the centralized federal docket have proceeded to trial to date. The federal judge overseeing that litigation has dismissed three of the four cases selected as bellwether trials. In the most recent dismissal, issued in October, the judge said Abbott had presented substantial evidence of the medical need for the formula and had shown that the plaintiffs' proposed alternative was not feasible.
Note: This report compiles the details presented at trial, statements attributed to the parties, and related judicial rulings reported in connection with the consolidated Cook County proceeding and other NEC litigation. It reflects the record as described in court filings and public statements at the time of the trial.