Quantcast

Class action alleges PFAS in infant formula

LEGAL NEWSLINE

Wednesday, December 18, 2024

Class action alleges PFAS in infant formula

Lawsuits
Webp stevenspaul

Stevens | https://www.stevenslc.com/

SAN FRANCISCO (Legal Newsline) - The maker of Enfamil infant formula faces a class action alleging the presence of chemicals known as PFAS.

A class-action lawsuit was filed May 14 in California federal court by Joel Hawes against Mead Johnson & Company, LLC., Reckitt Benckiser, LLC., and Does 1 through 10. The complaint alleges unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business acts and false and misleading advertising.

The lawsuit claims that the defendants have intentionally marketed, advertised, and sold a product line that includes infant formula products under the brand name "Enfamil". The plaintiff alleges that these products contain organic fluorine which poses potential health risks to infants. 

Furthermore, it is claimed that the defendants have failed to disclose this information to consumers while falsely marketing their products as safe feeding options for infants that undergo extensive quality checks.

The false advertising claims refer to Enfamil's marketing statements, like "Supporting the brain in everything we do" and "the health and safety of infants and children is our top priority."

The EPA has set a maximum contaminant level for PFAS in groundwater, despite criticisms research has failed to show a definitively link between them and human health issues.

PFAS are known as "forever chemicals" because the human body can't rid itself of them. Some research, funded by a DuPont settlement, suggests links to six diseases, including kidney and testicular cancers.

Litigation has sprung up in recent years, including private lawyers aligning themselves with government officials to represent them on contingency fees. Many of the cases are in a multidistrict litigation proceeding in South Carolina federal court, while consumer class actions like the Enfamil case are also being filed around the country.

DuPont is paying $1.185 to settle claims in the South Carolina MDL, while 3M is set to pay at least $10.5 billion. Lawyers will make around $1 billion in fees from those two settlements.

The plaintiff is represented by Paul D. Stevens and Lauren A. Bochurberg from Stevens LC law firm. 

More News