Missouri Appeals Court Orders New Trial for Similac, Enfamil NEC Lawsuit

Appellate judges found that the jury’s defense verdict went against the overwhelming weight of evidence presented at the first trial.

A Missouri appeals court has upheld a lower court’s decision to order a new trial in an infant formula lawsuit involving Similac and Enfamil, which alleges that the cow’s milk-based products caused a newborn to develop necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC).

Elizabeth Whitfield originally filed the lawsuit in 2022 on behalf of her son, Kaine. The case ultimately went to trial in October 2024 and ended with a defense verdict for Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson.

However, Missouri Circuit Court Judge Michael Noble later threw out that verdict and ordered a new trial in March 2025, after finding that attorneys for the infant formula manufacturers engaged in misconduct during the proceedings.

Judge Noble determined that the defense violated court instructions, presented evidence that had previously been excluded and suggested to jurors that babies could starve if Similac and Enfamil were removed from the market.

Infant Formula NEC Risks

Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) is a serious intestinal condition that primarily affects premature infants, whose gastrointestinal systems are not fully developed. The condition can occur when harmful bacteria penetrate the intestinal wall, causing inflammation and tissue damage.

In severe cases, NEC can cause portions of the intestine to die, leading to life-threatening complications. Treatment may require antibiotics or surgery to remove damaged sections of the intestine. Even infants who survive NEC can be left with long-term health problems and may require ongoing medical care.

These risks have led to a growing number of Similac lawsuits and Enfamil lawsuits against Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson. The lawsuits allege that the cow’s milk-based formulations increase the risk of premature infants developing NEC.

Similac and Enfamil NEC Verdict Appeal

Following the original trial in Whitfeld’s lawsuit, Abbott Laboratories and Mead Johnson appealed Judge Noble’s ruling to the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Eastern District, which issued an opinion (PDF) on August 11, upholding the judge’s decision.

“[T]his Court holds the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding a new trial was warranted on the ground the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. Accordingly, the trial court’s order is affirmed.”

– Judge Michael S. Wright, writing for the Missouri Court of Appeals

The appeals court emphasized that it was not permitted to independently reweigh the evidence presented during the trial. Instead, the judges were required to view the evidence in a manner favorable to Judge Noble’s decision and defer to the trial court’s assessment of conflicting testimony and witness credibility.

Abbott and Mead Johnson argued that Whitfield failed to present sufficient evidence that their products caused Kaine’s NEC injuries. However, the appeals court rejected those arguments, noting that both sides presented expert testimony on causation and that disagreement among experts did not mean Whitfield had failed to present a viable case.

The manufacturers also challenged Whitfield’s failure to warn claims, arguing that additional warnings would not have changed the outcome. The appeals court found that argument lacked merit, pointing to Missouri law establishing a presumption that an adequate warning would have been followed if one had been provided.

Abbott separately argued that Whitfield’s design defect allegations improperly challenged an entire category of cow’s milk based infant formulas. The appeals court rejected that argument as well, finding that the lawsuit targeted the products made by Abbott and Mead Johnson rather than attempting to establish that all infant formula products were inherently defective.

Ultimately, the appeals court determined that Judge Noble clearly identified the defense verdict as being against the weight of the evidence, which was sufficient under Missouri law to order a new trial. The panel therefore affirmed the ruling without addressing every remaining argument raised by Abbott and Mead Johnson.

The ruling clears the way for Whitfield’s claims against Abbott and Mead Johnson to return for another trial, where a new jury will again be asked to consider whether Similac and Enfamil products contributed to Kaine’s NEC injuries.

Infant Formula NEC Lawsuits

The decision in this Missouri state court comes as the first federal bellwether trial is currently underway, involving claims brought by Alexis Inman, whose infant son, Daniel, allegedly died due to necrotizing enterocolitis after being fed Enfamil Premature Formula.

However, in addition to Whitfield’s claim, several other state court cases have already gone before juries, with several resulting in massive damage awards against the formula manufacturers.

A separate 2024 trial in Missouri state court ended with Abbott being ordered to pay nearly $500 million to a woman whose daughter suffered NEC-related brain damage. In April, a Cook County, Illinois, jury issued a $70 million verdict in a Similac lawsuit.

Another Cook County jury returned a $60 million verdict in an Enfamil NEC lawsuit, yet an appeals court tossed that verdict out on June 12 and ordered a new trial.

While none of these bellwether trial outcomes are binding on other cases, they are still being closely watched since they could help attorneys reach a future Enfamil or Similac infant formula settlement agreement.

To stay up to date on this litigation, sign up to receive infant formula necrotizing enterocolitis lawsuit updates sent directly to your inbox.