By Top Class Actions  |  June 22, 2026

Category: Baby Products
Mead Johnson sign; Mead Johnson Nutrition, founded in 1905, is a manufacturer of infant formula.
(Photo Credit: testing/Sutterstock)

Infant formula lawsuit overview:

  • Who: An Illinois appellate court ordered a new trial for Mead Johnson in a lawsuit brought by plaintiff Jasmine Watson.
  • Why: The court found the trial judge erred in jury instructions and admitted prejudicial financial evidence. 
  • Where: The decision was issued by the Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District.
  • How to get help: If your premature infant was fed cow’s-milk-based formula, such as Similac or Enfamil, and was later diagnosed with necrotizing enterocolitis, you may be eligible to file a baby formula lawsuit.

Mead Johnson won a new trial after an Illinois appellate court overturned a $60 million jury verdict awarded to a mother who claimed the company’s infant formula caused her premature son to develop a fatal intestinal disease.

A three-judge appellate panel reversed a March 2024 verdict in favor of plaintiff Jasmine Watson, who sued on behalf of her deceased son, Chance. The court concluded the trial judge made legal errors that prejudiced the jury and required a new trial.

According to court records, Watson gave birth to Chance and his twin brother, Chase, in March 2020. The infants were born about two months premature and initially received breast milk and donor milk while being treated in a neonatal intensive care unit.

When the infants were transferred to a children’s hospital where donor milk was unavailable, medical providers added Mead Johnson’s Enfamil Premature formula, known as EPF24, to their diets. 

Shortly afterward, Chance developed necrotizing enterocolitis, a serious gastrointestinal condition that primarily affects premature infants. Chance later died from the disease.

Watson filed a lawsuit in 2021, alleging Mead Johnson failed to adequately warn about the risks associated with the formula. A jury ultimately awarded her $60 million, including damages for the loss of her son, grief and mental suffering, loss of normal life, pain and suffering, and emotional distress.

Appeals court says jury received improper instructions

A key issue in the appeal was whether Mead Johnson was required to warn Watson directly about the formula’s risks, or whether warning her son’s doctors was sufficient.

The appellate court determined the trial court should have applied Illinois’ “learned intermediary” doctrine, which generally requires manufacturers to warn physicians about known risks rather than providing warnings directly to patients.

According to the panel, Chance received the formula only under the supervision and direction of physicians in a hospital neonatal intensive care unit. The court said doctors were responsible for evaluating the risks and benefits of available feeding options and deciding whether the formula was appropriate.

“Considering the nature of EPF24 and the context in which the product was administered, we hold that the learned intermediary doctrine applied as a matter of law,” the court said, as reported by Law360. 

The appellate judges concluded the instructions to the jury incorrectly stated that Mead Johnson owed a duty to warn both Watson and the physicians caring for Chance. 

The appellate court found that error alone justified reversing the verdict and ordering a new trial.

The panel also criticized the admission of extensive evidence concerning Mead Johnson’s finances, including testimony about company revenues, profits, executive compensation and marketing budgets.

According to the court, the evidence created a risk that jurors would base their decision on the company’s wealth rather than on issues such as causation, product defect or the adequacy of warnings.

Mead Johnson welcomed the ruling, saying the decision “affirms our view of the applicable law.”

The company also maintained that the claims are unsupported by scientific consensus and noted that multiple neonatologists testified during the trial.

What do you think about the court’s decision to order a new trial in this infant formula lawsuit? Let us know in the comments.

Watson is represented by Ashley Keller, Ben Whiting, Amelia Frenkel and Zachary Clark of Keller Postman LLC; Sean Grimsley, Kenzo Kawanabe, Abigail Hinchcliff and Samara Hoose of Olson Grimsley Kawanabe Hinchcliff & Murray LLC; and David Cates of The Cates Law Firm LLC.

The infant formula lawsuit is Watson v. Mead Johnson & Co., Case No. 5-24-0936, in the Appellate Court of Illinois, Fifth District.


Don’t Miss Out!

Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!


Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

We tell you about cash you can claim EVERY WEEK! Sign up for our free newsletter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. By submitting your comment and contact information, you agree to receive marketing emails from Top Class Actions regarding this and/or similar lawsuits or settlements, and/or to be contacted by an attorney or law firm to discuss the details of your potential case at no charge to you if you qualify. Required fields are marked *

Please note: Top Class Actions is not a settlement administrator or law firm. Top Class Actions is a legal news source that reports on class action lawsuits, class action settlements, drug injury lawsuits and product liability lawsuits. Top Class Actions does not process claims and we cannot advise you on the status of any class action settlement claim. You must contact the settlement administrator or your attorney for any updates regarding your claim status, claim form or questions about when payments are expected to be mailed out.