Protecting Your Family: The Fight Against Toxic Baby Food
Toxic heavy metals in baby food have led to hundreds of lawsuits against some of the biggest baby food manufacturers in the US. These lawsuits allege that these companies knowingly sold baby food that contained unsafe levels of toxic metals, including arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury, and failed to warn consumers about its presence or dangers. Now, lawsuits from all over America have been filed with claims that exposure to these toxins causes children to develop autism and ADHD, lowers a baby’s IQ, and can cause other developmental problems.
The lawsuits started to be filed after a 2021 Congressional report raised concerns about the prevalence of heavy metals in baby food. As science started to connect these heavy metals to learning and developmental delays, like autism and ADHD, hundreds of parents have come forward to hold these companies accountable.
Now, due to the volume and similarity of these cases, they have been consolidated into a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) to help streamline the pretrial proceedings and to save everyone time and money.
The MDL’s success will depend on whether the science connecting heavy metals in baby food to developmental issues in children is accepted by the Courts and liability is established.
At Hach & Rose, LLP, we have always been dedicated to protecting individuals, workers, families, the elderly, children, and anyone who needs our help. And we are committed to advocating for their rights and seeking justice wherever we can. That’s why we are accepting baby food autism cases. Giant corporations do whatever they want, and it’s time for them to be held accountable.
If you believe your child was harmed by the high levels of toxic heavy metals in baby food, contact the product liability lawsuit lawyers at Hach & Rose, LLP. Our team of baby food lawyers has studied this case and is ready to help you. Call us today at (212) 779-0057 or contact us here.
New Updates on the Toxic Baby Food MDL Lawsuit
Read the latest updates on the lawsuits regarding Toxic Heavy Metals in Baby Food, including court proceedings, opinions from our lawyers, and any mentions of this important case in the news.
November 15, 2024 – Judge Sets a Date for Causation Hearings
Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley has scheduled a five-day general causation hearing to begin on December 8, 2025. This hearing will focus on whether heavy metals in baby food can cause autism and other disorders in children. Expert discovery is set to commence in April 2025, allowing both plaintiffs and defendants to compile reports from their expert witnesses.
November 7, 2024 – Deadlines Set for Expert Reports in Baby Food Lawsuits
Deadlines have been established for the submission of expert reports in the Baby Food Products Liability Litigation (MDL 3101). Plaintiffs’ expert reports are due on December 16, 2024, while defendants’ reports are due on January 15, 2025. These reports will present expert opinions based on scientific evidence regarding the alleged link between heavy metals in baby food and autism.
November 1, 2024 – 20 New Cases Added to MDL
The toxic metal baby food MDL saw significant growth in October, with 20 new cases added, nearly doubling its size and bringing the total number of pending cases from 32 to 52. This increase indicates a growing number of plaintiffs alleging harm from toxic heavy metals in baby food products.
October 17, 2024 – Judge Issues Order on Electronic Data Production
Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley issued a detailed order governing how electronic data will be produced in the baby food lawsuit. This order sets specific rules for electronically stored information (ESI), including file formats and document numbering, to streamline the discovery process in the MDL.
October 3, 2024 – FDA Drafting Guidance for Heavy Metal Levels in Baby Food
As part of its “Closer to Zero” campaign, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) is drafting updated guidance on allowable levels of heavy metals in baby food. The FDA’s target date to issue final guidance on lead levels in baby food is December 2024. The agency has been engaging with stakeholders to assess feasibility and best practices, aiming to implement new regulations for baby food manufacturers.
September 16, 2024 – New Contaminated Baby Foods Lawsuit Filed in California
A new lawsuit was filed in the Northern District of California on behalf of a minor diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, allegedly caused by toxic heavy metals found in products from Gerber, Nestlé, and Walmart. The plaintiff claims that the minor was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, allegedly caused by toxic heavy metals found in products from Gerber, Nestlé, and Walmart.
August 2024 – MDL Expansion and Leadership Appointments
In August, the Toxic Baby Food MDL expanded with the addition of new cases, bringing the total number of active cases within the MDL to 25. This growth reflects the increasing number of plaintiffs alleging harm from toxic heavy metals in baby food products. Additionally, the judge overseeing the MDL appointed 19 lawyers to lead the litigation for plaintiffs, including prominent attorneys R. Brent Wisner and Aimee Wagstaff as co-lead trial counsel.
July 27, 2024 – Abbott Ordered to Pay $495 Million in Baby-Formula Verdict
A jury ordered Abbott Laboratories to pay $495 million in compensation and damages after determining that the company failed to warn that its formula for premature infants increased the risk for a bowel disease. The verdict included $400 million in punitive damages. Abbott plans to contest the ruling.
July 5, 2024 – Preference Trial Set for January 2025
A preference trial has been scheduled for January 21, 2025, in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. This will be the first baby food trial in California state court related to the federal MDL.
This preference trial is a preliminary step within this MDL. Unlike a full trial, it won’t decide all the claims at once. Instead, it will focus on a specific legal issue with a small group of representative plaintiffs. This “test run” aims to reveal the strengths and weaknesses of each side’s arguments before a full trial. The goal of a preference trial is to potentially encourage settlements, narrow down the key legal points, and streamline the overall process for the MDL.
In simpler terms, it’s basically a smaller trial that evaluates some aspects of the case and potentially avoids a lengthy main trial in the future MDL.
Preference Trial vs Bellwether Trial
This concept may sound familiar since we have spoken about a similar concept called a bellwether trial before. While both a preference and bellwether trial offer early glimpses into how the overall lawsuit might fare, they focus on different aspects.
A preference trial tackles a specific legal issue to see how it plays out, like testing a single ingredient in a recipe. A bellwether trial, on the other hand, acts as a more complete rehearsal, like testing the entire recipe.
May 30, 2024: New Baby Food Lawsuit Filed in MDL from Texas
A new lawsuit has been filed and will be transferred to the Heavy Metal Baby Food MDL in California, as reported by Lawsuit Legal News. This case involves a Texas plaintiff diagnosed with autism who consumed baby fsood products from Beech-Nut and Gerber early in childhood. The lawsuit alleges these products contained significant quantities of toxic heavy metals that exceeded regulatory limits and led the plaintiff to develop neurodivergence.
May 20, 2024 – Customer Reward Programs Could Provide More Than Discounts for Injured Plaintiffs
Your loyalty account at your favorite grocery store and shopping app could play a crucial role as evidence in the toxic baby food lawsuits.
Every time a customer types in their phone number at Walgreens, or scans their Costco card, or uses the Target app to pay, their purchases are recorded. These records—which meticulously track what you purchase, your buying history, frequency, quantity, how often you shop, and on and on—could potentially provide a literal map of the specific baby food brands and products purchased by the injured plaintiffs in the Toxic Baby Food MDL.
In theory, customers (or, more accurately, their lawyers and a team of investigators) will be able to pull these records, which would significantly strengthen the plaintiff’s claim that they regularly fed their child the exact baby foods in question.
May 17, 2024 – First Status Conference Held in Toxic Baby Food MDL
The first status conference for the toxic baby food multidistrict litigation (MDL) took place yesterday in the Northern District of California. Among the matters they were scheduled to address were initial pretrial matters, a review of joint statements from both plaintiffs and defendants, and the appointment of leadership roles. That means the plaintiffs’ lead counsel and the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee (the group responsible for guiding the litigation strategy for the injured plaintiffs) were determined. One of those attorneys on the steering committee is a colleague of mine, Anthony Russo, from Dolman Russo PLLC.
The conference also covered procedural issues, the MDL schedule, and potentially any early disputes.
The plaintiffs’ lawyers want the bellwether trials to begin immediately, but like always, the defendants are likely to attempt to delay proceedings. The longer the case takes, the more likely plaintiffs are to settle for a smaller amount just to avoid the wait. This strategy might backfire though, since the scientific evidence supporting the plaintiffs’ case grows stronger.
May 14, 2024 – New Legislation Proposed Over Toxic Baby Food
New legislation has been proposed in Congress to address the issue of toxic metals in baby food. This might sound silly because we already have an entire administration for that called the FDA. But oversite and regulations have been cut at every chance by some in the hall of Congress, so here we are: with lead in our children’s food in the year 2024.
The proposed laws would mandate federal regulators to set and enforce science-based limits on harmful metals like arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury in baby foods.
Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) introduced the “Baby Food Safety Act of 2024” on May 9, 2024 in the Senate. This act aims to amend the “Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act” to ensure the safety of baby food and limit the amount of tolerated contaminants. I, like you right now, am wondering why the limit isn’t zero, but here we are.
Similarly, Representatives Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) and Tony Cárdenas (D-CA) introduced a corresponding bill, H.R. 6756, in the US House of Representatives. If passed, this legislation would dramatically increase the FDA’s authority over baby food regulation and impose stricter testing and sampling requirements on manufacturers. This would help ensure safer food options for infants and toddlers.
Whether either of these bills will be heard or debated, much less passed is still to be seen.
April 11, 2024 – The Toxic Baby Food Lawsuits Have Officially Been Consolidated into an MDL
On April 11, 2024, a big step was taken for plaintiffs in the toxic heavy metal baby food litigation. Today, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has approved the consolidation of all baby food lawsuits into the North District of California. The baby food multidistrict litigation will be presided over by Judge Corley in the Northern District of California.
The MDL was created because the JPML decided that “All actions share common issues of fact regarding the presence of heavy metals in defendants’ products, their knowledge of and testing for heavy metals in their products, whether the presence of these heavy metals could have caused plaintiffs’ alleged injuries, and whether defendants adequately warned of the presence of heavy metals in their products.”
Much like a class action lawsuit, this means that all (or most) of the toxic baby food lawsuits across the country will be consolidated into one federal case to handle pre-trial proceedings and decisions. Unlike a class action lawsuit, the cases will be heard individually once the main issues are sorted out together in the MDL.
We expect that thousands of baby food lawsuits will be entered into the MDL.
If you believe you might have a claim, consult with a mass tort lawyer right away so they can evaluate your case, make sure you have not missed any deadlines, and give you appropriate advice from there. Hach & Rose is currently accepting toxic baby food cases from all 50 states.
Understanding The Toxic Baby Food Lawsuits
The term “toxic baby food” refers to infant and baby foods that have been contaminated with harmful substances, specifically heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury.
These contaminants were not purposefully added, yet the baby food manufacturers did not warn parents about their presence.
Toxins in the food that parents feed to their babies are not just a minor oversight; they represent a significant cause for concern over food production, testing, and monitoring, and, of course, the risk to infant development and health and how the food we consume can cause lifelong issues.
The toxic baby food lawsuits center around allegations that these major baby food manufacturers knowingly sold the products even after they were aware that they contained harmful levels of heavy metals. As the science becomes more clear, parents are suing these manufacturers for exposing their children to these metals and claiming that they cause health problems like autism, ADHD, and other developmental issues.
Who is being accused?
The baby food autism and ADHD lawsuits have named some of America’s largest baby food manufacturers, including:
- Gerber
- Hain Celestial (Earth’s Best Organic)
- Walmart (for its store-brand baby foods)
- Plum Organics
- Beech-Nut
- Sprout
Gerber has faced many allegations of disregarding product safety and labeling protocols over the years. But more recently, they have faced allegations of mislabeling and failing to warn parents.
In 2015, Gerber was named in a lawsuit filed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for mislabeling. Gerber falsely claimed that its Good Start Gentle formula could prevent or reduce the risk of allergies. The FTC challenged that these claims were not scientifically proven.
The following year, in 2016, Gerber faced a recall due to a choking and allergy hazard over specific batches of their Cheese Ravioli Gerber Pasta Pick-Ups. The packaging failed to disclose that the product contained eggs, which posed an allergy risk, and the product’s shape and size caused a potential choking hazard.
The current allegations, which began in 2021, accuse Gerber, among others, of abnormally high levels of toxic metals in several of their baby foods, which potentially contributed to developmental disorders in children like autism and ADHD.
Gerber is obviously one of the largest leading brands of baby food in the U.S., so it has naturally faced some accusations. Some of the smaller companies have also faced past accusations, and some of them have not.
There are no well-documented allegations against Earth’s Best Organic, Walmart store-brand baby foods, or Sprouts-brand baby foods.
However, Plum Organics has issued voluntary recalls of their baby food products in the past. In 2013, they recalled a bunch of their products in pouches due to a manufacturing defect that could cause spoilage.
Beech-Nut has also dealt with other problems, like in 2015, when it voluntarily recalled some of its baby food products after a consumer found glass in one of their products.
Heavy Metals in Baby Food Accused of Causing Autism and ADHD
Over the last couple of years, whether heavy metals in baby food products cause autism and ADHD has been a cause for concern. This has caused scientists, federal regulators, and other organizations like Consumer Reports to investigate these serious allegations. But what exactly is autism and ADHD?
What is Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)?
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a complex developmental condition that involves life-long challenges in social interaction, speech and nonverbal communication, and restricted and/or repetitive behaviors.
Autism is usually a life-long condition and manifests itself differently in almost every person, which is why autism is considered a “spectrum.” The types, symptoms, and severity are more varied than almost any other disorder.
The DSM-5, which is used to diagnose mental conditions, now classifies ASD as a single diagnosis that includes other conditions that used to be separate, including Autistic Disorder, Asperger Syndrome, Childhood Disintegrative Disorder, and Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS). This is yet another indicator of how hard it can be diagnosed and the many ways it can manifest.
Usually, autism is diagnosed in early childhood. Awareness of the condition has allowed for earlier diagnosis and intervention, usually between 2-5 years old, which can result in improvements. The key is to get them to help with their learning, speech, social skills, etc., rather than just letting them go unchecked.
What is Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)?
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder that is characterized by consistent inattention and/or “hyperactive-impulsive” behavior that interferes with a child or person’s development and functioning. ADHD symptoms typically appear in children, often by the age of 12, and usually continue into adulthood. There are medications that can treat ADHD, but unfortunately, a medicine that is not steeped in side effects has not been fully developed.
Unlike autism, ADHD is easier to notice, and it is more understood by the medical community.
You may remember that ADHD and ADD used to be two separate disorders, but more recently, all of the versions of attention disorders have been combined and simply separated into three types based on the main symptoms. These include Predominantly Inattentive Presentation, Predominantly Hyperactive-Impulsive Presentation, and Combined Presentation.
Just like autism, early diagnosis and intervention can make a big difference in how the disorder affects children both during childhood and into adulthood.
What Causes ADHD and autism?
The exact causes of autism and ADHD are not fully understood, but research has shown that the causes are complex and likely involve a combination of factors, including genetic, biological, and environmental. Some genetic mutations appear to be inherited, and others seem spontaneous. In ADHD, it may also be passed down from the parents.
There is also evidence of biological factors, including differences in brain structure or function. In people with ASD specifically, their neurotransmitter systems or hormonal imbalances may contribute to the cause.
Older parents, pregnancy or birth complications, and prenatal exposure to toxins, drugs, and alcohol are also risk factors.
Finally, environmental factors have been shown to contribute to autism and ADHD. These factors may include infections, medications, pollution, and exposure to heavy metals like lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury. These metals may be found in old paint, pipes, and baby foods.
In ADHD specifically, early childhood trauma or stress can contribute to the onset of ADHD symptoms.
Despite extensive research, no single cause for ASD and ADHD has been identified, and it’s likely that it’s a combination of these factors.
Nobody is saying that toxic heavy metals in baby food are the only cause of autism or ADHD or that all babies who eat the products listed in the lawsuit will definitely develop autism or ADHD. The autism baby food lawsuits are about holding baby food manufacturers accountable for failing to warn consumers, failing to provide a safe product, negligence, and making money off the whole thing.
Although autism and ADHD are not fully understood, and their causes are not fully understood, it doesn’t mean that companies can produce dangerous products that they know to contain harmful toxins that have been proven to contribute to developmental disorders.
The Link Between Baby Food and Autism
Scientific research started to find a connection between the ingestion of these toxic elements from baby food and developmental disorders in children, including autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children.
Various studies have shown that early exposure to these toxins in infants and children can lead to developmental delays and long-term neurological issues.
Because of the severity of this connection, it’s critical that parents and caregivers are aware of these findings so that they can make informed choices for their children.
Neurotoxic Effects
Heavy metals are associated with disruption of the neurotransmitters in the brain, oxidative stress, and neuroinflammation, all of which potentially contribute to or exacerbate ASD symptoms.
Epidemiological Studies
Some epidemiological studies (studies related to diseases) have found correlations between higher exposure to these metal toxins and increased rates of autism in children. However, these studies often caution that correlation does not establish causation and that further research is needed to explore whether they are linked or if one causes the other.
Longitudinal Studies
Longitudinal studies (which are conducted over a long period of time) are being conducted to monitor and track the exposure levels of these metals from infancy into childhood and observe any corresponding development of ASD or any other developmental disorders.
Meta-Analyses
Meta-analyses examine multiple studies to compare their findings, methods, and results in order to reach a wider conclusion. Recent meta-analyses have been conducted to study the overall evidence for a link between exposure to toxic metals in baby food and autism. These studies provide a more thorough analysis that can guide further research and policy.
Experts Call For Precaution
Experts in pediatric health, neurology, and toxicology are calling for stricter regulations and better monitoring of heavy metal contaminates in baby food. Although a direct causation link to autism is not definitively proven, many experts believe that just the potential risk justifies immediate action to ensure food safety for infants. Pediatricians also suggest that wherever possible, parents and guardians should minimize reliance on processed baby foods that are known to have higher risks of contamination until more research is available. This might include formulas from smaller brands, milk alternatives, and breast milk from the mother or from a breast milk-sharing service.
Overall, while there is significant concern and some suggestive evidence linking heavy metals in baby food to developmental issues such as autism, the scientific community continues to research this complex relationship to provide clearer answers and better guidance for parents.
What Toxic Metals Are In Baby Food?
As we have mentioned, heavy metals such as lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury have been found at high levels in some commercial baby foods and may be linked to the development of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in children. These metals are known neurotoxins and can interfere with brain development in critical early stages.
- Arsenic: Inorganic arsenic is the most concerning form of the metal, and it can be present in fruits and vegetables like rice, sweet potatoes, and carrots. Arsenic is the most common toxic metal found in foods.
- Lead: Lead contamination comes from the soil and from older processing equipment.
- Cadmium: Cadmium can be absorbed by crops from contaminated soil or water.
- Mercury: While less common in baby food compared to the others, mercury exposure can happen through bioaccumulation in fish. Though it is less common, there are many common baby foods that contain mercury.
What Baby Foods Contain Heavy Metals?
Some of the baby foods that contain high levels of heavy metals are rice puff snacks, teething biscuits, and rice rusks.
How Do Heavy Metals Get Into Baby Foods?
The most common way that toxic metals get into baby foods is contamination from the source. Heavy metals like lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury occur naturally in soil and rocks. They can be absorbed by plants grown in contaminated soil or taken up through irrigation water. This is why it’s so important that the source product, like rice, is grown safely and that everything is tested.
Industrial activities and the use of certain pesticides can release heavy metals into the environment, further contaminating soil and water sources and, again, getting absorbed into the plants that are harvested and turned into baby food.
Contamination can also happen during processing and packaging. Older processing equipment or components used in manufacturing can leak metals into the food. The lining of certain storage containers, especially if not properly regulated, may contain trace amounts of heavy metals that can leach into the food.
It’s important to note that organic baby food isn’t necessarily free from heavy metal contamination. While organic growing practices can reduce exposure to pesticides and other chemicals, they can’t control the natural presence of heavy metals in the soil or what might happen during processing and packaging.
What Are Baby Food Manufacturers Being Sued Over?
To understand the legal arguments against baby food manufacturers, it’s important to understand the difference between the legal theory of an ‘Act’ and the’ Cause of Action.’
- The Act (Action or Omission) refers to the specific behavior that caused the harm. In this example, it’s the act that the baby food manufacturers produced and sold products with high levels of dangerous toxic metals.
- The Legal Theory (Cause of Action) explains why the action is illegal or violates certain regulations. In this case, the defendants are being accused of negligence, failure to warn, breach of warranty, and unjust enrichment.
Here are definitions of each of the legal allegations being charged in the baby food lawsuits.
Negligence
Negligence refers to the “failure to take reasonable care to avoid causing injury or loss to another person.”
In the baby food lawsuits, we believe the manufacturers were negligent by producing food products that contain harmful levels of toxic metals such as lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury. This also includes failing to adequately supervise the sourcing of ingredients, manufacturing processes, or testing protocols that could have prevented this harmful contamination.
Failure to Warn
Failure to warn claims that the manufacturers failed to adequately warn consumers about the dangers of their product. Had they warned parents and guardians, they could have prevented harm to children and prevented a lifetime of hardships and financial difficulties.
We believe these formula and food companies knew or should have known about the presence of toxic metals in their products but failed to inform anyone about the risks.
Breach of Warranty
A breach of warranty is a failure to meet the terms of a promise or claim made about the quality of a product. In these lawsuits, we allege that the baby food products did not meet reasonable consumer expectations that popular baby foods would be safe and free from harmful contaminants.
Unjust Enrichment
Unjust enrichment occurs when one person is “enriched” at the expense of another. We believe the manufacturers profited from the sale of their unsafe baby foods at the expense of consumers, parents, families, and children.
These allegations are the main legal strategies that we will be using in these lawsuits against the baby food manufacturers named in the suit.
What Can I Be Compensated for in the Baby Food Lawsuits?
We are seeking compensation for the direct and indirect harms and losses suffered by our clients, including:
Medical Expenses
This includes all current and future medical bills related to the child’s diagnosis and treatment, such as occupational, physical, and speech therapy, doctor visits, medications, and special equipment.
It also covers projected costs of ongoing medical care throughout the child’s life, considering potential future needs and inflation.
Educational Expenses
Educational needs and costs must be taken into account in cases involving developmental issues in children. This includes costs associated with specialized educational schools, programs, tutors, and other aides to support the child’s learning.
This can include current educational costs and future costs, depending on the age of the child.
Lost Wages
Lost wages can include wages that the parents were unable to earn because of their child’s needs. It also takes into account the loss of earning capacity, which compensates for the child’s potential future loss of income due to their developmental disorder.
Pain and Suffering
Pain and Suffering is not a tangible amount of money that can be calculated with receipts and projections. This compensation is more about the pain, discomfort, embarrassment, and inconveniences that the families and children will face.
This includes the physical and emotional pain the child and parents endure due to any disorders the child develops. This can also include loss of enjoyment of life, which compensates for the impact the disorder has on the child’s ability to participate in activities, socialize, and experience life at the same level as their peers.
Punitive Damages
Punitive damages refer to monetary compensation that is intended to punish the wrongdoer for their misconduct and, importantly, to deter other similar companies and industries from engaging in similar conduct.
Other Damages
In cases of this complexity, damages can include many other costs.
- Out-of-Pocket Expenses
- Parental Care Costs
- Emotional Distress
- Sibling Impact
Not all affected plaintiffs will receive al of these damages. What each families receives depends on the specific details of individual case.
What stage is the toxic baby food lawsuit at?
Hundreds of individual lawsuits have been filed across the country against baby food manufacturers who are accused of failing to prevent toxic chemicals from contaminating their products.
Because there were so many cases, all with similar complaints, led to the plaintiffs’ attorneys requesting that the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) combine the lawsuits. The JPML, a federal panel of judges, reviewed the motion.
Finally, in April 2024, a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) was created to consolidate most of these cases into a single federal court to streamline the proceedings. This was a significant step in the movement of the case.
What are the next steps in the toxic baby food lawsuit?
The next steps in the MDL will be:
- Pre-trial motions to decide things like dates and procedures.
- Establish leaders for both sides (called steering committees).
- Discovery is exchanged among parties, including expert witnesses.
- Testimony is challenged, especially in cases with a large scientific element. The defendants will challenge the expert’s opinions (in this case, that toxic metals in the baby food led to developmental disorders).
- Daubert hearings are usually held so the Judge can make a ruling on the strength of the arguments and scientific evidence.
- If the evidence is allowed, the case will move forward, usually to test trials called Bellwether Trials.
The key issue in this case will be whether a scientific link can be established between the heavy metals and development issues in children.
Our firm is deeply involved in this litigation and is currently accepting viable cases to be filed into the toxic baby food lawsuits.
Why Choose Hach & Rose, LLP?
Hach & Rose, LLP is well-known for its expertise in handling complex product liability cases against some of the biggest, most well-funded corporations in the world, including, asbestos lawsuits, Camp Lejeune lawsuits, hair straightener uterine cancer lawsuits, Ozempic lawsuits, Paraquat lawsuits, Philips CPAP lawsuits, Suboxone tooth decay lawsuits, and, of course, baby food heavy metals lawsuits.
Our success is documented through numerous client testimonials and past case results, where we have secured compensation for individuals and families who have been harmed by corporate greed.
Our approach focuses on a commitment to justice, comprehensive legal strategy, and personable client relationships.
Don’t let your concerns go unheard. If you believe your child has been affected by toxic baby food, contact Hach & Rose, LLP today for a free consultation. We can review your case and discuss your options. Contact us online or by calling (212) 779-0057.
At Hach & Rose, LLP, we are not just lawyers; we are advocates for your family’s health and future.
