NEC in Newborns Contracts

Our Eligibility & Screening Criteria in NEC in Newborn Cases

The team of Atraxia Media has vast experience in delivering contracts to legal clients based on their specific criteria. We have become knowledgeable with regard to cases of necrotizing enterocolitis in babies who were given formula based on cow milk, and thereby have what it takes to aid you in launching your NEC in Newborns campaign, and have signed contracts delivered to your law firm. Our team is ready to implement a retaining campaign that will entail the following:

• Pre-screening. Because we understand that you want to avoid wasting time evaluating the situation of each and every client who requests your services, our team will efficiently take care of the pre-screening of all prospective clients to clearly determine whether they are a good fit for your law firm. We are aware that not every person who reaches out to you meets the eligibility criteria, and this is where our team comes in.
• Screening each case. Since we will have solid knowledge concerning your eligibility criteria, we will screen each potential client by asking simple questions and conducting interviews to see whether their case would be suitable to be taken up by your law firm. Our primary mission during this step of the process is to get to the core of each case so as to differentiate between eligible and ineligible clients.
• Following up with potential NEC in Newborn clients. To maximize the effectiveness of interaction with prospective clients, we will follow up with every person who seems to qualify for filing a claim with the assistance of your law firm. Our follow-up strategy takes into consideration the period of time during which the prospective client is available to talk, among other important aspects.
• Delivering signed contracts to your law firm. Deciding to work with our team of experts is a very wise idea, as you are bound to receive a constant flow of signed contracts from us. We are committed to providing you with the contracts you need.
• Connecting you with a greater volume of prospective NEC in Newborns claimants. We have been working on increasing the number of good cases a law firm receives for several decades, which means that we have the necessary experience and resources to make sure that you will experience a heightening in the volume of clients.
• Running in-house marketing strategies that generate cases. By virtue of our internal intake department, we receive the leads in real-time, and they are subsequently assessed based on the criteria you provided us.
• Getting NEC in Newborns, potential plaintiffs, entirely exclusively to your law firm. At the moment, plaintiffs involved in necrotizing enterocolitis in prematurely born infants cases are in high demand. However, we will strive to discover the best clients specifically for your law firm.

People who are eligible to file an NEC in Newborns claim must have a child who meets the following criteria:

• they were born prematurely, at 37 weeks or less, or they were born underweight, at 5 pounds and a half or less
• they were given Enfamil or Similac formula after 2012 in the hospital while in the newborn intensive care unit
• they were diagnosed with necrotizing enterocolitis within 2 weeks of receiving formula based on cow milk
• they passed away as a consequence of necrotizing enterocolitis or the health complications it caused

Consequently, if you are a lawyer who specializes in cases of this kind and plan to take up as many as possible, we encourage you to give our team a call, and we will quickly get to work so as to make sure you will benefit from the best clients, as well as from the largest number of qualifying cases. Our areas of focus include personal injury and defective products, which means that we have everything necessary to help your business flourish.

NEC in Newborns: Facts & History

As a rare condition in babies who are born on time, necrotizing enterocolitis is quite common in infants who are born prematurely, namely before 36 weeks of gestation. Necrotizing enterocolitis is a very serious condition and is often fatal, as it causes intestinal tissue to die rapidly, which may result in a hole in the abdomen of the baby. Subsequently, bacteria can escape through that hole and lead to the development of severe abdominal infections. If the medical team fails to promptly address necrotizing enterocolitis, the baby will most likely die or have to struggle their entire life with debilitating health complications such as the following:

• brain injuries
• cerebral palsy
• blindness in both eyes
• intestinal perforation
• liver problems
• short bowel syndrome
• intestinal stricture
• developmental delay
• failure to thrive

Annually, over 380,000 babies are born prematurely in the U.S., and nearly 70% of necrotizing enterocolitis cases occur in premature infants. It is crucial to note that a major risk factor for necrotizing enterocolitis is feeding the baby formulas based on cow milk during the time they spend in the newborn intensive care unit instead of breast milk. Up to 80% of baby formulas on the market contain cow milk, which is very unsettling when we consider premature babies. The reason why formulas based on cow milk can lead to necrotizing enterocolitis is that these products lack the essential probiotics that are naturally found in breast milk.

In 2012, the members of the American Academy of Pediatrics distinctly stated that children born prematurely must be fed human breast milk exclusively, which is the only way to avoid the onset of necrotizing enterocolitis. As a consequence, parents of babies who came to struggle with this condition after 2012 have the legal right to file a claim for the suffering of their child, as well as to seek compensation for wrongful death if the infant passed away due to necrotizing enterocolitis.

ABBOTT LABORATORIES, ET AL., PRETERM INFANT NUTRITION PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No. 3026

Location:

• Northern District of Illinois

Presiding Judge:

• Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer

Plaintiffs:

• Plaintiffs of MDL 3026 include parents with premature infants who were diagnosed with necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) after receiving cow milk-based formula products early in life.

Defendants:

• Abbott Laboratories and Abbott Laboratories Inc.
• Mead Johnson & Company, LLC and Mead Johnson Nutrition Company

Products:

• Similac and Enfamil

Plaintiff Allegations:

Plaintiffs allege that manufacturers misrepresented the safety of their products in marketing and failed to warn parents about the risks of developing necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) among preterm infants after ingesting the cow milk-based products.

History:

2026:

• February (scheduled): The fourth NEC bellwether trial (Inman v. Mead Johnson & Company, LLC, et al.) will be held on February 2, 2026.

2025:

• November (scheduled): The third NEC bellwether trial (Brown v. Abbott Laboratories) is scheduled on November 3, 2025.
• August (scheduled): The second NEC bellwether trial (K.B. v. Abbott Laboratories) is set to take place on August 11, 2025.
• May: The first bellwether trial set for May 5 was dismissed after the judge granted summary judgment to Abbott Laboratories on May 2, 2025. The case was filed on behalf of the mother, whose premature child was diagnosed with NEC mere hours after the first formula feeding and passed away the day after. The infant's physician testified that a stronger warning on the formula would not have changed the baby's treatment plan. The MDL bellwether trials will move forward with the second NEC bellwether case.
• May: As of May 1, 2025, there were 710 pending cases in MDL 3026.
• March: A St. Louis judge has ordered a new trial for an old case against Abbott and Mead Johnson in October 2014, where a Missouri judge ruled in the companies' favor. The judge's ruling was made after finding that the defendants' lawyers engaged in 'misconduct' that may have led to an unfair jury verdict. The defense lawyer was found to be acting in 'bad faith' and repeatedly violated court orders during the October trial.
• February: Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson filed a motion for summary judgment, citing that the plaintiffs lacked admissible expert testimony and that the NEC risk was caused by 'absence of human milk' and not formula products.

2024:

• October: A St. Louis, Missouri jury ruled in favor of defendants Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson, deciding that the companies were not responsible for a young boy's NEC diagnosis after being fed formula milk at St. Louis Children's Hospital. The seven-year-old has continued to have developmental and health problems for years.
• July: A Missouri jury awarded $495 million (Gill v. Abbott Laboratories) to the family of an infant who received cow milk-based products and developed NEC, requiring extensive surgeries and long-term health issues. The family was awarded $400 million (punitive damages) and another $95 million in compensatory damages.
• March: An Illinois jury decided on a $60 million verdict against Mead Johnson, siding with the mother of an infant who passed away from NEC after receiving Enfamil formula milk.

2023:

• August: A personal injury and product liability lawsuit (Payton v. Abbott) was filed in MDL 3026 on August 15, 2023, where the plaintiffs alleged that Abbott's formula product caused NEC.
• June: A lawsuit against Mead Johnson (Hayes v. Mead Johnson & Co, LLC, et al.) was transferred to MDL 3026. The complaint alleged that Enfamil Premature 24, a cow milk-based formula by the defendant, caused gastrointestinal distress and eventual NEC diagnosis of a premature infant. According to the case, the baby received the formula 28 times during his first month.

2022:

• October: Abbott Laboratories agreed to a $19.5 million settlement for a class action lawsuit to resolve claims that its Similac infant formula does not make as many servings per package as promised on the labels. The settlement benefits consumers who bought various Similac products between June 24, 2016, and September 22, 2022. The settlement covers a number of Similac product lines, such as Advance, Sensitive, Total Comfort, and Organic.

2021:

• May:

• In May of 2021, the parents of a prematurely born infant who passed away due to necrotizing enterocolitis took legal action against the manufacturers of Similac, alleging that the companies failed to warn consumers with regard to the deadly risks. More precisely, the wrongful death lawsuit was filed against Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson & Company, LLC, both companies that produce Similac. It was filed on May 14, 2021, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California by Alicia Restad and Daniel Renteria-Hernandez, the parents of Daniel Renteria-Hernandez.
• According to the lawsuit, the child was born on April 29, 2019, at Dignity Hospital in Merced, California. He was a premature newborn, weighing only 2 pounds and 2 ounces after just 31 weeks of pregnancy. As a consequence, he was placed in the neonatal intensive care unit of the Valley Children's Hospital, where he was fed Similac formula to stimulate his growth and development. At 16 days, Daniel passed away due to necrotizing enterocolitis. The lawsuit states that the manufacturers of Similac failed to warn consumers with regard to the danger for babies who are fed this formula of developing and dying from necrotizing enterocolitis (case number 1:21-cv-00798).

• June:

• In June of 2021, the parents of another child who was fed Enfamil in the hospital because the boy had been prematurely born also filed a lawsuit because he eventually developed necrotizing enterocolitis. His treatment involved surgery to remove a considerable part of his intestines. The lawsuit was filed in Madison County Circuit Court against Mead Johnson Nutrition, the company that manufactures the baby formula.
• Alarmingly, neither Similac nor Enfamil has been recalled, despite the multiple lawsuits filed against the manufacturers. The Similac lawsuit invoked a study from 1990 in which 926 newborns were found to be 6 to 10 times more susceptible to developing necrotizing enterocolitis if they were given exclusively formula based on cow milk in comparison to babies who were fed breast milk. Furthermore, over the past 3 decades, there have been numerous reputable medical studies pointing to the same risk associated with formula based on cow milk when it is given to premature babies (case number 21-L-000560).