BigClassActions.com
Advertisement

Lawsuit Questions Similac Recall

- by

San Diego, CAA lawsuit filed in the wake of the Similac recall questions the conduct of Abbott Laboratories, maker of Similac baby formula. The Similac formula recall was announced after beetles and larvae were found in an area of a Similac formula production plant.

The lawsuit, filed by a woman who says she purchased Similac for her son, alleges Abbott breached express and implied warranties. It further alleges that Abbott Laboratories likely knew that the Similac baby formula contained beetles days before the recall was announced.

The plaintiff, Jessica Tosh-Surryhne, seeks class-action status for her lawsuit on behalf of all Similac buyers.

According to the lawsuit, Abbott Laboratories owed a duty to disclose facts that it either knew or should have known about the beetle contamination. The lawsuit alleges unjust enrichment, fraudulent concealment, breach of express warranties, breach of implied warranties, false and misleading advertising, and unfair and deceptive business practices under various state laws. The lawsuit does not seek damages for personal injuries.

Court documents filed by the plaintiff allege that the defendants decided "to market and sell Similac infant formula when Defendants knew, or should have known, that their products were adulterated and harmful to infants."

Questions of fact that will be answered by the lawsuit, according to court documents, include whether Abbott's conduct was illegal, whether they engaged in false and deceptive advertising, whether the plaintiffs are entitled to damages, whether Abbott's practices harmed consumers and whether Abbott was unjustly enriched by its conduct.

A similar lawsuit was filed by an Illinois mother, who alleged that Abbott Laboratories knew about the insects on September 16th but waited a week before announcing the recall. Abbott responded to that lawsuit saying the company acted in the best interests of children and the lawsuit is without merit.

The recall was announced on September 22, 2010, after beetles and larvae were found in an area of a Similac production plant. Only powdered infant formulas were affected by the recall. Although the company said the tainted formula would not harm infants, the FDA acknowledged that some babies might suffer gastrointestinal discomfort and have difficulty feeding. Parents of babies whose symptoms lasted longer than a few days were advised to seek medical attention.

Similac Legal Help

If you or a loved one have suffered losses in this case, please click the link below and your complaint will be sent to a who may evaluate your Similac claim at no cost or obligation.

Reader Comments

Posted by

on
You used your child as a guinea pig? You "tested" your theory a "few times"? I think they should hire you and your baby as researchers.

Posted by

on
When my son was an infant I discovered I couldn't give him powdered similiac or liquid if from the cans because he developed blotchiness and digestive issues with swallowing, as if allergic, but the ready made 32oz quart plastic bottles never had an adverse impact on him. Although the WIC consultants, pediatrician and other referred doctor for his "digestive" issue disregarded my concerns that if it wasn't an allergy to metal containers then what else could it be? I suspected there was something coming off the metal used in making the "can" containers for both powdered and concentrated liquid formula and whatever it was it was contaminating the contents. In the end it was not a metal or aluminum allergy either, he has never had that reaction with any other product consumed that was stored in cans. I tested theory throughout first year of his life a few times and it was same response each te with canned similar. But no one believed me.

Add Your Comment on This Story

Please read our comment guidelines before posting.


Note: Your name will be published with your comment.


Your email will only be used if a response is needed.

Request Legal Help