Toxic Baby Food Autism Lawsuit

Baby Food Autism Lawsuit

BOOK A FREE CONSULTATION

We Represent Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder Who Were Exposed to Heavy Metals in Baby Foods

Legally Reviewed & Fact-Checked

This page was written and fact checked by Matthew Dolman. Matthew has been a licensed attorney for twenty years and has collected over $250 Million in compensation for injured clients. Further, Matthew is actively involved in managing Dolman Law Group’s toxic baby food litigation and investigating contaminated baby food claims on behalf of the firm. Dolman Russo is a law firm comprised of Matthew Dolman, Stanley Gipe and Anthony Russo.

Anthony Russo has been selected as a member of the plaintiff’s steering committee in the heavy metals in baby food lawsuit that has been consolidated in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Baby food litigation is going to be a long battle. However, we are very confident in this lawsuit’s success. The baby food lawsuit has significant implications for a whole generation of our youth. Consuming baby food contaminated with toxic heavy metals has been proven by a bevy of scientific studies to inhibit the brain development of toddlers, and study after study illustrates arsenic, lead, mercury, and cadmium are a danger to human health.

We are proud that our law firm (Anthony Russo of Dolman Russo) is a member of the plaintiff’s steering committee in the Baby Food Autism Lawsuit. The baby food lawsuit could significantly change the industry and protect our youth from cumulative exposure to heavy metals in baby food, such as arsenic and lead.

The long-term health impacts due to cumulative exposure to contaminated baby foods are strongly related to the development of neurodevelopment disorders such as autism and ADHD.

The baby food lawyers at Dolman Russo presently represent over 1000 children who were diagnosed with autism after consuming baby food contaminated with heavy metals such as lead and arsenic. These lawsuits are against major baby food brands such as Gerber, Beech-Nut Nutrition Company, Plum Organics, Nurture, Walmart, Sprout Foods, and Hain Celestial.  

If your child was harmed as a result of consuming contaminated baby foods, our baby food lawyers remain ready, willing, and able to assist you in your pursuit of justice in the baby food autism lawsuit.

A Quick Summary of the Toxic Baby Food Lawsuits

  • Our firm is focused on representing children exposed to dangerously high levels of heavy metals in baby food who have been diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)
  • Toxic baby food lawsuits are being filed against various baby food manufacturers due to the alleged presence of toxic heavy metals in their products, such as arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury.
  • These lawsuits claim that exposure to these harmful substances in baby food poses serious health risks to infants and children, including autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
  • We are actively pursuing baby food lawsuits against the following manufacturers: Gerber, Beech-Nut, Plum Organics, Sprout Foods, Nurture (Happy Baby & Happy Family Organics), and Walmart (Parent’s Choice). Certain baby food brands, including the ones just referenced, have long known of the dangers posed by cumulative exposure to heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, and mercury.
  • The baby food lawsuit alleges the manufacturers knew their products contained heavy metals that are toxic to the developing brain. The manufacturers of the baby foods listed above continue to sell tainted baby food.
  • Both the American Academy of Pediatrics and the World Health Organization (WHO) have recognized and spoken out about the dangers posed by the ingestion of toxic heavy metals in baby foods. In fact, the American Academy of Pediatrics has stated that there is no acceptable level of exposure to heavy metals safe for children.
  • Plaintiffs in these cases are seeking compensation and accountability from the accused baby food manufacturers for failing to ensure that their products are safe.
Toxic Baby Food Autism Lawsuit

Baby food is expected to be held to the highest quality and safety standards to protect the health of the children who consume this product. It is no secret that children are particularly vulnerable as a demographic to even small amounts of harmful substances. So revelations concerning the high amounts of heavy metals such as lead, arsenic, mercury, and cadmium found in baby food have led to lawsuits against the responsible baby food brands. 

We believe the science is very clear in this developing lawsuit. There appears to be a causal link between toxic baby foods and autism spectrum disorder.

There is a body of scientific literature and peer-reviewed studies on the dangers toxic heat metals pose to the developing brain. Several major baby food brands continue to sell their products despite constructive knowledge of their products’ dangers to infants.

Dolman Law Group/Dolman Russo is at the Forefront of the Toxic Baby Food Lawsuit

Dolman Russo is now providing legal representation for those with children who suffer from neurodevelopmental disorders like autism related to the consumption of baby food brands found to contain toxic substances.

Our product liability lawyers have experience handling cases involving dangerous products that harm consumers, specifically those that affect children. These dangers include baby formula, Tylenol, and contaminated water supplies.

Contact Dolman Russo to discuss your toxic baby food autism lawsuit to learn more about the compensation for damages you and your child have suffered as a result of baby food contaminated with heavy metals certain toxic metals. 

Our toxic baby food lawyers offer free consultations, and we are prepared to listen to the details of your case. Call our office at 727-451-6900 or complete a contact form online.

Schedule A Free Consultation

BOOK A FREE CONSULTATION

Toxic Baby Food Lawsuits

By March 2024, over thirty (30) lawsuits had been filed in federal and state courts against various baby food companies, such as Gerber, Beech-Nut, and Sprout.

More lawsuits will be filed individually or as part of class actions as time passes. Toxic baby food autism lawsuits have been filed against baby food companies by parents whose children were diagnosed with autism or other related conditions after consuming products with dangerous levels of heavy metals that were knowingly placed on the market. 

Some of these product liability lawsuits have been filed over the negligent production and sale of tainted baby food, while others have been filed because there was no labeling warning of the risk the heavy metals in the baby food posed to a baby’s health.

Toxic baby food litigation is expected to explode in 2024. There is a motion before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to consolidate all toxic baby food lawsuits before a single Judge to streamline pretrial proceedings such as discovery. This process is known as multidistrict litigation.

There is a good chance that a large block of toxic baby food cases against specific manufacturers will be consolidated into an MDL. 

Individual Baby Food Autism Lawsuits

Thanks to civil law, consumers harmed by products with a defect in design, manufacturing, or labeling during the use of those products as intended can seek compensation for damages from the relevant liable parties, which in this case would consist mostly of baby food manufacturers. Product liability lawsuits allow consumers the opportunity to get their lives back on track after an injury caused by a harmful product. They can also help make sure that those responsible suffer the consequences because of their negligence. 

Plaintiffs in these cases must be able to connect the injury they suffered to the defect in the product in question and prove that their damages resulted from the product’s use.

In 2021, the release of the House subcommittee’s report on baby food heavy metal contamination provided overwhelming and credible evidence of heavy metals in baby food, leading to the filing of many individual lawsuits by outraged parents. 

Class Action Lawsuits Over Heavy Metal in Baby Food

Most of the individual lawsuits initially filed over heavy metals in baby food have since been withdrawn by plaintiffs, likely due to settlements with the baby food companies wishing to keep these cases from going to trial.

As more people came forward with cases of children developing autism and other health issues related to heavy metals in baby food, the need for multidistrict litigation and class action lawsuits has grown. 

In many situations where a defective product harms a large swath of consumers, the sheer amount of potential lawsuits makes handling each one individually untenable for the courts and almost everyone involved, which is why class actions exist.

Instead of each case being filed individually by each plaintiff, many plaintiffs come together to file their collective lawsuits as one with a single representative. This alleviates strain on the courts and can give many plaintiffs an increased chance of seeing fair settlements. 

However, class action lawsuits may not offer the same level of compensation that individual lawsuits may provide. Class action lawsuits also do not take into account the unique differences in each case and how that can affect a plaintiff’s needs in terms of compensation for their damages. 

Toxic Baby Food Autism Lawsuit Updates

Before we explain the basis of these class action lawsuits, let’s look at how the cases have progressed and the current status of the litigation. Originally, baby food lawsuits requested a refund for the baby food purchased because the consumers weren’t warned about the dangers of toxic levels of heavy metals contained in the food. Later, the lawsuits focused on the children who were diagnosed with autism after consuming the toxic baby food.

What started as a potential baby food class action lawsuit morphed quickly into individual baby food autism lawsuits filed in Federal Courts throughout the United States. In turn, each and every baby food lawsuit filed in federal court has been consolidated into multidistrict litigation.

The Judicial Panel of Multidistrict Litigation recently consolidated all heavy metals in baby food lawsuits before a single judge, Judge Jacqueline Corley of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

We believe the toxic baby food lawsuit has the potential to completely reshape the baby food industry. The plaintiff’s steering committee is headed by the lawyers who defeated Bayer (which bought Monsanto) in the Roundup litigation. We expect toxic baby food litigation to be a hard-fought war but remain extremely confident in its ultimate success.

We expect an army of lawyers retained by major baby food brands such as Gerber, Beech-Nut, Nurture, Plum Organics, Walmart, Hain Celestial, and Sprout Foods to fight every issue tooth and nail in the baby food autism lawsuits.

Specific baby food brands have been battling toxic baby food claims in State Courts for the past three years. This battle is only heating up, and this is the page to follow for updates on this lawsuit. Please bookmark this page. We are committed to providing the most up-to-date, robust update on baby food lawsuits anywhere on the internet. 

January 1, 2025 – Claims Against Defendants Amazon and Whole Foods are Dismissed, Congressional Report and Multidistrict Litigation Signal Potential Industry Reform

Claims under the Louisiana Products Liability Act against retailers Whole Foods and Amazon were dismissed by the MDL judge, who found that these companies could not be classified as “manufacturer-sellers” responsible for the presence of heavy metals in the baby foods they sold. The court held that the retailers did not control or influence the products’ safety and, as such, could not be held liable under this statute.

However, the judge dismissed a separate claim against Amazon with leave to amend. If the plaintiff can present evidence showing Amazon undertook specific responsibilities to ensure product safety through its processes, they have the opportunity to refile by December 20th.

A 2021 Congressional Report brought national attention to the alarming presence of toxic heavy metals in many popular baby food brands. This report may have contributed to declining profits for baby food makers as consumer trust eroded. Today, the growing MDL provides hope not only for families seeking compensation for their injured children but also for systemic changes in industry practices and regulatory oversight.

If this litigation results in stricter regulations and accountability for baby food manufacturers, it could have far-reaching effects. Generations of children could be protected from harmful toxic exposures, potentially leading to better overall public health outcomes. The Dolman Russo team is accepting baby food cases and helping families care for their children and possibly change the future.

In January, California state court will host the first heavy metal baby food trial to see how a jury responds to claims that toxic metals in baby food have caused harm to children. Should the jury find that baby food manufacturers were aware of the presence of these toxic metals but failed to adequately warn consumers, the decision could influence the resolution of cases within the federal multidistrict litigation (MDL).

At the same time, progress continues in the MDL, with the court establishing key deadlines for expert discovery, motion hearings, and the submission of a standardized short-form complaint for all plaintiffs. Additionally, the Dolman & Russo team is closely monitoring discussions about Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s potential nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services by the incoming administration. If appointed, Kennedy’s stance on heavy metals in food products could bolster the plaintiffs’ position.

At Dolman Law Group, we often receive questions like, “How much time do I have to file an injury claim?” This answer depends on the statute of limitations, a legal deadline that each state sets for filing a lawsuit. These deadlines can vary widely depending on the specifics of the case, and they often change when a child is the one who has suffered an injury. In these cases, the timeframe may differ from those for adults, and some states allow additional time to file.

If your child was harmed by a toxic baby food, it’s essential to understand these time constraints and gather the necessary evidence to support your case. Dolman Law Group’s skilled injury attorneys can clarify the laws relevant to your case and help ensure you don’t miss any critical deadlines.

Building a strong case against a manufacturer requires specific proof: claimants must demonstrate they purchased and used the harmful product, describe how it caused injury, and document the resulting losses. For example, showing a record of purchase and providing medical documentation of the child’s injury are crucial steps. If you’re a baby food brand loyalty club member, those records may support your case further by demonstrating ongoing purchases.

Save any purchase receipts, medical bills, and records of care-related expenses. Collecting this evidence now will put you in the best position to build a successful claim with the help of your attorney.

In this multidistrict litigation, the discovery process surrounding electronically stored information (ESI) plays a pivotal role. The plaintiffs are seeking access to documents and communications from the defendant companies, which include both baby food manufacturers and major retailers that sold the products under scrutiny. The aim is to uncover key internal and external exchanges, such as:

  • Discussions among company leadership regarding potential contamination, especially those who continued selling the products despite learning of contamination risks.
  • Evidence showing the companies were aware of dangerous levels of heavy metals in their baby food but failed to report this to the FDA or inform consumers.
  • Test results indicating toxic levels of heavy metals that were disregarded by the defendants.
  • Documentation from the FDA concerning whether the companies complied with federal safety regulations.
  • Details about ingredient sourcing, including whether the companies knew of contamination issues but continued to use compromised suppliers.
  • Additional information that could strengthen the plaintiffs’ cases against the defendants.

This information could be crucial in building a compelling argument in favor of the plaintiffs. Our team will provide further updates on this important issue when the court finally resolves these disputes.

At the last court appearance, the MDL judge entered discovery orders requiring certain disclosures and evidence preservation actions. More specifically:

  • The Defendants have run tests to determine if their baby food and ingredients contained heavy metals. These companies must provide those test results along with the baby food formulas from 2012 until 2021.
  • Defendants also tested the water used to make the food products. They must disclose those test results covering the same timeframe.
  • If any third-party companies were involved in the production of the baby food in question, the defendants must disclose those companies.
  • Defendants must describe the actions they took to preserve relevant evidence for this litigation and when those actions began.
  • Both sides are to file an agreed-upon proposal by September 19th regarding how electronically stored information (ESI) will be exchanged. Any disagreements must be stated, and both sides can provide arguments for their respective positions.
  • Future case management conferences are scheduled for September 26, November 7, and December 12.

Judge Corley has set a deadline of noon on August 20th for both parties to submit a joint order updating the court on ongoing discovery battles. The next hearing in the baby food autism lawsuit is scheduled for August 22, 2024. 

Defendant manufacturers, including Beach-Nut, Gerber Baby Foods, Sprout Foods, Happy Family Organics, and others, allege that plaintiffs’ interrogatories requesting testing information and levels of heavy metals in specific baby food products are overbroad. We believe that the testing and procedures, or lack thereof, utilized by defendant manufacturers go to the heart of the baby food lawsuit and what we, plaintiff lawyers, are alleging. 

At this juncture, the various defendant baby food manufacturers have not demonstrated rigorous testing protocols and procedures to safeguard our children from toxic substances, including heavy metals.

Based on some recent actions by the plaintiffs and defendants in the baby food autism MDL, it looks like there will be some tension over the discovery process. Lawyers for the plaintiffs in the toxic baby food lawsuits have served interrogatories on the defendant baby food manufacturers with general questions about their testing and procedures related to heavy metals in their foods.

In response, the defendants have objected to the plaintiff’s questions, claiming they are too broad for this stage of litigation. The parties brought this issue up at the last status conference with Judge Corley, who has encouraged both parties to try resolving the issue independently to prevent it from being a court matter, if possible. We hope this issue plays out in favor of the plaintiffs, and we will keep you updated once we hear more.

To keep the litigation moving and avoid stalling by the defendants, the court has ordered all parties to begin the discovery and information-gathering process unless a Motion to Dismiss is filed. While this MDL is still small compared to other multidistrict litigation, we expect it to grow quickly as discovery proceeds.

Lead counsel for the plaintiffs has filed a Master Complaint, which is a comprehensive document that combines many different claims against the manufacturers of baby food that may be harming children. The complaint essentially alleges certain baby foods contain toxic heavy metals that may cause autism and ADHD in the children who consume them.

Using a Master Complaint will streamline the litigation process and allow many plaintiffs to seek the compensation they deserve based on the negligence of the food makers.

Twenty-nine lawsuits have been filed into the baby food lawsuit MDL. Federal lawsuits were recently consolidated before Judge Jacqueline Corley in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. We believe toxic baby food litigation will grow slowly as the plaintiff’s steering committee is carefully selecting only well-vetted claims. 

Judge Corley recently made it easier for plaintiffs to file their lawsuits via a direct filing order. This enables baby food lawyers to file their lawsuits directly into the MDL. However, Judge Corley is wary of multi-party complaints absent the parties residing in the same household. 

All baby food lawsuits contain common issues concerning facts and law. They all allege personal injury was sustained by the child after being exposed to high levels of heavy metals such as lead, arsenic, and mercury. The lawsuits are against specific baby food brands, and the injuries alleged are either autism spectrum disorder or ADHD. 

The MDL saw a modest expansion last month with the addition of two new baby food lawsuits. This gradual increase in case numbers is typical in the early stages of litigation. Potential plaintiffs are not immediately pressured to rush their filings, as many states offer extended timeframes for submitting claims on behalf of minors.

This measured pace allows for thorough case preparation and gives families ample time to consider their legal options.

The extended statute of limitations for minors in most jurisdictions provides a buffer, ensuring that affected families can take the necessary time to gather evidence, consult with medical experts, and make informed decisions about pursuing legal action.

As the litigation progresses, it’s likely that the number of cases will grow more rapidly. However, this initial slow growth period is crucial for establishing precedents and shaping the overall direction of the MDL.

It allows legal teams on both sides to refine their strategies and arguments, potentially leading to more effective representation for all parties involved.

The gradual influx of cases also gives the court system time to adapt and prepare for the potential increase in lawsuit volume, ensuring that each case receives proper attention and consideration as the MDL moves forward.

The next status conference is set for Thursday (June 20, 2024) in San Francisco, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, before Judge Jacqueline Corley. 

We believe an issue that will receive significant attention is the overall definition of general causation, which will guide discovery conducted by both plaintiffs and defendant manufacturers, such as Gerber, Beech-Nut, Hain Celestial Group (Earth’s Best Organic), Plum Organics, and Nurture, among others. 

We believe the focus in determining general causation should be on the heavy metals found in within baby foods as compared to baby food in general. 

In other words, can plaintiffs prove through expert testimony that the cumulative ingestion of heavy metals commonly found in baby foods cause neurodevelopment disorders such as ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder) or ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). 

Another issue that will be addressed is discovery related to ESI (electronically stored information) and protective orders over specific corporate representatives. Defendant manufacturers have already filed motions with Judge Corley requesting that the Federal MDL follow the same procedures already determined by multiple State Court Judges. 

Keep in mind that toxic baby food lawsuits have been pending in various State Courts, and Judge Corley may opt to follow prior rulings. However, State Court orders are considered persuasive authority, and Judge Corley is in no way obligated to follow them.

In other words, toxic baby food lawsuits have been filed in various Federal circuits since 2020. However, the recently formed toxic baby food MDL is the first time these lawsuits pending in various Courts have now been consolidated before a single Judge in one jurisdiction. 

Discovery will soon commence against a number of different manufacturers of baby food products. Our toxic baby food lawyers are beginning to consolidate our cases against every conceivable confounding factor for neurodevelopment disorders such as autism. 

We strongly believe the defendant manufacturers are not going to give an inch and it is the responsibility of plaintiff lawyers to only file extremely strong cases in the MDL.

At the end of May, information was released about the first status conference for the toxic baby food MDL led by Judge Corley. The agenda includes initial pretrial proceedings, reviewing joint statements from plaintiffs and defendants, and considering leadership appointments such as plaintiffs’ lead counsel and the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee.

Attorney Anthony Russo from Dolman Russo, who is also affiliated with Lawsuit Legal News, has been named to the Plaintiffs Steering Committee and will help represent all plaintiffs during the pre-trial proceedings held in this multidistrict litigation. 

The Dolman Law Group team is certain that Attorney Russo will be a valuable member of the leadership in the toxic baby food MDL.

The conference also addressed procedural issues, the MDL’s timeline, and some early disputes. Plaintiffs are pushing for early bellwether trials, while defendants are seeking to delay litigation to pressure injured parties into lower settlements, which could be risky as the scientific evidence supporting the plaintiffs’ case continues to grow.

Senator Amy Kloubachar of Minnesota and Tammy Duckworth of Illinois introduced a new bill that would force the FDA to set maximum allowable limits of toxic heavy metals found in baby foods. 

The FDA commissioner previously asked a Senate Subcommittee for more authority to regulate and oversee the food industry in the same manner it handles drug manufacturers. Sadly, the FDA lacks full authority to set guidelines for baby food manufacturers at this juncture.

In only four weeks, the multi-district litigation (MDL) consolidated 26 cases for pre-trial procedures. Two recent cases, one from Nevada and one from Illinois, include similar allegations against baby food manufacturers such as Beech-Nut Nutrition Company and Gerber.

This MDL involves parents whose children have been diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and/or other neurodevelopmental conditions. The parents claim their children were injured after eating baby food with dangerously high levels of heavy metals, such as arsenic, lead, and mercury.

The predominant legal theory is that baby food manufacturers made and sold food products containing heavy metal amounts that exceeded regulatory levels. The complaints further allege the companies failed to warn parents about the potential dangers associated with this food. The parents also state if they had known about these dangers, they certainly would not have given this food to their children.

Possible damages requested include brain injuries, pain and suffering, ASD, reduced quality of life, all related medical expenses, and future costs. Some plaintiffs have requested punitive damages against the baby food companies to deter them from harming other children.

The MDL Judge, Jacqueline Scott Corley, has a solid resume that should help her manage the litigation. Judge Corely is a Harvard graduate (manga cum laude). She also worked in the private sector and as a judicial clerk before assuming the role of United States Magistrate Judge.

Judge Corley’s background also includes Alternative Dispute Resolution mediation experience, which can only help when the parties begin settlement discussions. United States District Court for the Northern District of California has been a very favorable jurisdiction for plaintiffs in mass tort actions.

Judge Corley’s first pretrial order covered procedures regarding the filing of lawsuits and pleadings in the MDL prior to the initial hearing that was scheduled for May 16, 2024, in San Francisco. Additionally, the initial order set a deadline of April 29, 2024, for attorneys seeking to apply to serve on the plaintiff’s steering committee. The Court will appoint the plaintiff’s steering committee shortly after the initial status conference.

We anticipate numerous lawsuits will be filed into the MDL over the coming weeks against every major baby food brand. The lawsuits will have common allegations that any measurable amounts of lead and arsenic can impact a child’s brain development. Further, the complaints will certainly allege baby food manufacturers knowingly sold packaged foods with exceedingly high levels of heavy metals that could greatly impact a child’s development.

As we anticipated, the federal judges serving on the JPML ruled that the toxic baby food lawsuits warranted consolidation. This does not come as a surprise, given that the product liability claims share many similarities. The plaintiffs have alleged the same types of injuries, specifically developmental and behavioral disorders like autism and ADHD, were caused by exposure to lead, mercury, and other heavy metals in tainted baby food.

Beyond that, the defendants are all facing scrutiny for allowing their baby food products to be contaminated with heavy metal toxins. The court will consider the plaintiffs’ position that the baby food manufacturers are liable for their damages based on the same lines of reasoning. Plaintiffs believe the manufacturers neglected their duty to keep products safe through testing and monitoring, and by failing to warn consumers about possible heavy metal exposure.

Now, the existing heavy metal baby food lawsuits will be transferred to the same jurisdiction as multidistrict litigation. The JPML has assigned the product liability claims to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley of the Northern District of California. This U.S. District Court handles many class action lawsuits, including the Uber sexual assault lawsuits and the Tepezza hearing loss lawsuits.

Like most defendants facing mass tort claims, the baby food manufacturers argued against the need for consolidating the cases into a multidistrict litigation. Representatives for Gerber and Beech-Nut, among others, essentially said that an MDL would be redundant because the small number of claims and their established system makes further organization unnecessary.

The defendants requested that if the toxic baby food claims proceeded as an MDL, the JPML let a federal judge in the Southern District of New York oversee the cases. Both Gerber and Beech-Nut are headquartered nearby in New Jersey and New York, respectively. Not only did the JPML disagree with the defendant’s position on the need for an MDL, but the panel chose a location across the country from their preferred jurisdiction.

On the other hand, plaintiffs are pleased with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation’s ruling, as they have been seeking a toxic baby food MDL for months. At the time of the JPML ruling, the heavy metal baby food lawsuits spanned 11 districts, which likely contributed to the judges’ decision.

Hopefully, we will see a more expedient resolution and fairer settlement outcomes now that the baby food autism lawsuits are being handled as multidistrict litigation. Keep in mind that just because the toxic baby food plaintiffs can coordinate their cases, that doesn’t mean you should forgo hiring your own product liability attorney.

Depending on a child’s level of exposure to heavy metals in the defective baby food and other factors like their existing health conditions, the severity of a developmental condition like autism can vary greatly. That means damages can also vary between plaintiffs, so it’s best to have a toxic baby food attorney who is looking out for your specific case.

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) held a hearing at the end of March to decide if all federal cases alleging toxic baby food can lead to autism should be consolidated into a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL). The team at Dolman Law Group expects the JPML to create an MDL and issue a transfer order over the next two weeks.

We are projecting all federal lawsuits claiming heavy metals in baby foods can cause autism will be consolidated before one Judge in either the Northern District of California, the Southern District of California, or the District of Nevada.

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) is scheduled to hear arguments for and against consolidating all toxic baby food lawsuits on March 28, 2024, in Charleston, South Carolina. We are curious about whether all claims against all manufacturers will be consolidated. Gerber and Beach-Nut are the two largest corporations involved in these cases. We are particularly interested in seeing whether the JPML also includes lawsuits against several other baby food companies.

Parents who filed lawsuits against several big baby food makers filed a motion in January to consolidate all federal cases into an MDL to help move their cases more quickly through the system. Several of the large food manufacturer defendants, including Gerber Products Co., Beech-Nut Nutrition Co., and Hain Celestial Group Inc., are opposing the MDL.

These lawsuits are filed by parents who claim their children developed Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) or ADHD after consuming baby food that contained toxic heavy metals. The defendants claim there is insufficient scientific proof of a connection, but this is not the time to argue that issue. We are waiting for a decision from the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to see if and where an MDL may be formed.

Plaintiffs in the toxic baby food lawsuits are actively pushing for a Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) hearing in hopes that their cases can be consolidated into a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL).

The plaintiffs want their cases centralized into an MDL to improve efficiency in managing the large number of cases, streamline proceedings, promote consistent rulings, and expedite a resolution. An MDL not only ensures all of these things, but it usually saves both parties money (since defendants don’t have to try 300 different cases across the country, and plaintiffs can pool their resources for things like discovery and expert witnesses).

And, of course, if an MDL speeds up a resolution, the injured parties can get their money a lot sooner if they get a favorable outcome.

The date for the JPML hearing, or if there will even be one, has not been determined yet.

An appeal has been filed in the California lawsuit dismissed by Judge Lawrence Riff. We remain hopeful the plaintiff’s lawyers will be able to establish specific causation that a particular baby food caused autism. 

California State Court Judge Lawrence Riff found the plaintiff failed to meet their burden to admit expert testimony. Judge Riff presided over a Sargon hearing (California’s version of a Daubert examination wherein the Court acts as a gatekeeper in the evaluation of expert scientific testimony. Judge Riff states in his order the methodology utilized by the plaintiff’s crucial expert was “a too-far leap of logic and a too-great analytical gap to be tolerated.” More specifically, Riff states the plaintiff admits to consuming baby foods from seven different defendants. Thus, it is difficult to determine and prove that any one specific product caused the subsequent prognosis of a neurodevelopmental disorder. 

Previously, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Amy Hogue presided over the first Sargon hearing in this case. She found plaintiff’s experts employed sound methodologies in illustrating toxic heavy metals found in baby foods by major brands can be a substantial factor in causing autism. 

An article published in late June by Consumer Reports publishes findings of alarmingly high levels of arsenic, lead, and cadmium in popular brands of baby and toddler foods. All three are considered toxic to infants and have been found to cause developmental delays. An issue that will continue to impact this litigation is the plaintiff’s burden to prove specific causation. More specifically, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the use of a specific baby food product led to the diagnosis of autism.

The first true test of manufacturers’ liability for toxic baby food was originally scheduled for the beginning of this month. That jury trial has now been reset to October 2023. We’ll keep you posted about the last-minute pre-trial happenings and the trial itself.

Five plaintiffs in Nevada allege Beech-Nut, Gerber, Plum, Sprout Foods, and Walmart baby food caused autism. The legal arguments include strict liability, failure to warn, breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, three forms of negligence, and unjust enrichment, as well as violations of state-specific Nevada laws. The plaintiffs are demanding compensatory and punitive damages.

Another case in Texas ended mid-trial when the court agreed the plaintiffs had not proven a causal connection between lead, arsenic, and other heavy metals in baby food and autism. Those plaintiffs did not have qualified expert witness testimony to support the connection, showing just how important expert testimony can be in these types of cases.

Finally, the FDA had previously set deadlines for creating guidelines to reduce toxic metals in baby food. Those deadlines were removed from the FDA website, and we now wonder if the FDA will ever take the action needed to protect children from these risks.

After an adverse ruling in New Jersey, several federal class action lawsuits were voluntarily dismissed. However, more state cases are expected, especially in California, where the courts have ruled favorably for the plaintiffs in these baby food cases.

Although the FDA found toxic heavy metals in 33 out of 39 baby food samples back in 2007, it refused to set limits or issue guidance about maximum safe amounts of metals in food. This month, the FDA finally released a report stating baby food cannot exceed lead levels of 10 parts per billion in vegetables, fruits, grain, and meat mixtures. Once the regulations are final, the FDA can take action against any baby food manufacturers that exceed this limit.

Several baby food manufacturer defendants have filed motions to dismiss them from the lawsuits based on two arguments. First, they argue that there is insufficient scientific evidence to prove baby food can cause autism even with high levels of heavy metals. Second, the defendants claim that because federal authorities regulate the presence of heavy metals in baby food, the manufacturers are not responsible under a preemption argument.

Over the past several months, many more lawsuits have been filed, and a first trial is scheduled for May 2, 2023, in Los Angeles. The most common defendants in these cases are Nurture, Inc., which produces Happy Baby Organics food, Gerber, Hain Celestial, Sprout Foods, Beech-Nut, Parents’ Choice, and Plum.

A California court found the evidence linking heavy metals to autism has a strong enough foundation to allow a lawsuit to proceed to trial. In federal court, a California judge ruled that a toxic baby food class action case could go forward based on the argument that Walmart knowingly sold baby food containing toxic metals.

Toxic heavy metals are well known to cause severe health issues among adults who inadvertently consume them, let alone children who can suffer even more damage with smaller doses. For example, lead pipes are known to cause even more harm to the health of young, developing children compared to adults who also consume water from the same pipes. 

While lead pipes are a well-known issue that persists today, baby food has long been considered safe. Unfortunately, several studies have confirmed that this could not be farther from the truth regarding certain brands and the baby foods they make.

Toxic Baby Food Autism Lawsuit

Concerns about the presence of heavy metals in food products are nothing new, but now these concerns extend to baby food. Reports of heavy metals in food prompted several investigations into the extent to which baby food was affected. 

As early as October 2017, the Clean Label Project, a small nonprofit based in Colorado, published a report where they tested 500 samples of baby food and infant formulas for a variety of toxins like heavy metals. They found that 30% of all products they tested contained detectable levels of lead. 

This disturbing revelation prompted a myriad of institutions and organizations to undergo their own investigations into baby food toxic heavy metal contamination

  • In 2018, the FDA conducted its own investigations into childhood food-based lead exposure, which led to the conclusion that food was, in fact, a large source of lead exposure among young children. 
  • By analyzing the FDA’s food tests, the Environmental Defense Fund found that there were measurable levels of lead in 20% of the baby products that were tested. 
  • In August 2018, Consumer Reports published results of their tests on 50 popular baby food products that found about two-thirds contained what they called “worrisome levels” of at least one neurotoxic heavy metal. 
  • In 2019 Healthy Babies Bright Futures reported that 95% of 168 containers of baby foods they tested contained one or more toxic heavy metals. 

What Are Toxic Metals?

Toxic metals, including lead, arsenic, mercury, and cadmium, can damage health even in tiny amounts. These metals are found in nature, but human activities like mining, industry, and farming can boost their levels. Unlike the minerals your body needs to stay healthy, toxic metals offer no benefits. Instead, they can build up over time and cause a host of problems.

People can come into contact with these dangerous substances through air, water, soil, and food. Babies and young children face the biggest risk because their bodies and brains are still growing. Toxic metals can hinder brain development, which might cause long-term cognitive and behavioral problems.

When it comes to baby food, the metals can come from dirty soil where farmers grow crops or from the materials used to package and make the food. Parents should know about these dangers so they can make smart choices about what to feed their kids.

Dangers of Toxic Heavy Metals is Well Established

Toxic heavy metals are well known to cause severe health issues among adults who inadvertently consume them, let alone children who can suffer even more damage with smaller doses. For example, lead pipes are known to cause even more harm to the health of young, developing children compared to adults who also consume water from the same pipes. While lead pipes are a well-known issue that persists to this day, baby food has long been considered safe. Unfortunately, several studies have confirmed that this could not be farther from the truth when it comes to certain brands and the baby foods they make.

The U.S. House Oversight Subcommittee Baby Food Staff Report

Eventually, Congress investigated, and in February 2021, the United States House of Representatives Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy, headed by Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, released a report that confirmed that many well-known baby food brands such as Gerber, Earth’s Best, and others contained dangerous levels of toxic heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury in their baby food products. 

Not only did the report state that these many baby food brands had products containing toxin levels above the limits set by the FDA, but it also uncovered that many of these brands had set their own standards that they themselves chose to ignore. 

Many of the brands do not even test their products for certain heavy metals. Even when these baby food brands did test for heavy metals, they tested their ingredients and not the finished product, which is believed to obscure test results with even higher concentrations of the harmful substances.

Major Baby Food Brands Ignore the Congressional Report 

When some brands were forced to recall their baby food products under pressure from consumers and regulators, they still failed to cooperate fully. Beech-Nuts’ 2021 baby food recall was incomplete, and Gerber outright failed to recall their products that were found to have dangerous levels of heavy metals. 

The congressional investigation requested internal documents and test results from seven of the largest baby food manufacturers in the country, specifically: 

  • Nurture, Inc. (Nurture), which sells Happy Family Organics, including baby food products under the brand name HappyBABY
  • Beech-Nut Nutrition Company (Beech-Nut)
  • Hain Celestial Group, Inc. (Hain), which sells baby food products under the brand name Earth’s Best Organic
  • Gerber
  • Campbell Soup Company (Campbell), which sells baby food products under the brand name Plum Organics
  • Walmart Inc. (Walmart), which sells baby food products through its private brand Parent’s Choice
  • Sprout Foods, Inc. (Sprout Organic Foods)

Of the seven, only Nurture, Beech-Nut, Hain, and Gerber cooperated, while Walmart, Campbell, and Sprout Organic Foods refused to comply. The report notes that their refusal to cooperate raises concerns that they may be obscuring the fact that their products potentially have even higher levels of toxins than their counterparts. All of the companies that complied with the investigation had baby food that contained arsenic, lead, mercury, and cadmium to varying and often very concerning degrees.

These are the largest baby food companies and represent a large portion of this particular market. Still, this controversy potentially could include several other smaller manufacturers not involved in this congressional report. 

To put things into perspective, the FDA has a strict limit for lead in bottled water at 5 ppb (parts per billion). In many of these brands, the lead content that was measured in tests would reach as high as 641 ppb in some Nurture (HappyBABY) products and 886.9 ppb in ingredients used in Beech-Nut baby food products.

These brands love to write on their website that these heavy metals are naturally found in water and that’s why they are in their products. As you can see above, water has 5 ppb; some baby foods have nearly 887 ppb. So how did the water with 5 ppb make the baby food product have 887 ppb? Manufacturers of various baby foods like to paint the new lawsuits as an indictment on the entire industry. The truth is that only certain baby foods have alarmingly high levels of heavy metals.

It should be noted that The FDA, CDC, WHO, EPA, AMA, and AAP agree that any amount of lead exposure among babies drastically increases the health risk of developmental and cognitive disorders. 

Certain baby foods, such as rice-based foods like puffs and teething biscuits, as well as those that utilize carrots and sweet potatoes, were found to have particularly high levels of heavy metals since those ingredients absorb them more from the soil.

The house subcommittee report highlighted the following findings regarding heavy metal contamination of popular baby food products. 

  • Beech-Nut rice cereal tested up to 125 ppb inorganic arsenic and averaged 85.47
    ppb inorganic arsenic 3
  • Beech-Nut’s practice of testing ingredients, rather than finished products, for
    toxic heavy metals appears to have contributed to its failure to detect the
    dangerous inorganic arsenic levels in its recalled products;
  • Gerber’s rice cereal tested up to 116 ppb of inorganic arsenic, and its average rice cereal product contained 87.43 ppb of inorganic arsenic, which is even higher than the amount contained in Beech-Nut’s average rice cereal product. While BeechNut recalled some of its products and completely discontinued sales of its rice cereal, Gerber has taken no such actions to protect consumers; and
  • Gerber’s organic rice cereal is dangerous and has been found to contain up to 76
    ppb inorganic arsenic and an average of 65.6 ppb inorganic arsenic.

Parents are well aware that their children are especially sensitive to even trace amounts of potentially harmful substances, which is why the market for children’s and baby products is held to a much higher standard. 

Toxic heavy metals pose a particularly dangerous threat to the health of children since even the smallest amounts can increase the risk for several developmental and behavioral disorders. 

Heavy metal exposure directly causes damage to the brain due to heavy metals making their way through the bloodstream to your brain tissue through the blood-brain barrier, where they collect and disrupt neurological function through inflammation, oxidative stress, and the displacement of essential minerals. This is bad enough for adults, but children with still-developing brains can suffer permanent damage that can alter their path of growth in negative ways. 

Developmental and behavioral disorders can be debilitating and potentially detract from a child’s future quality of life. Toxic heavy metals in baby foods and their exposure among young children have repeatedly been found to lead to an increased risk of developmental disorders such as autism and ADHD. 

Autism spectrum disorder is a broad range of conditions characterized by challenges with social skills and repetitive behaviors, as well as speech and nonverbal communication. Autism is a spectrum and can affect those with it in several ways. 

Different people with autism will often face different challenges posed by different symptoms that can be more severe or subtle. Heavy metal exposure among children has also been shown to also cause the following issues.

  • Developmental delays
  • Learning disabilities
  • Reduced IQ
  • Behavioral disorders such as ADHD/ADD
  • Neurological defects
  • Cancer
  • Compromised immune systems

Heavy Metals in Baby Food and Autism

There are four major offenders when it comes to heavy metals found in baby foods. Lead, mercury, arsenic, and cadmium are all well-known for their toxicity and are ubiquitous natural substances that come from inside the earth. 

All four of these heavy metals are on the Environmental Protection Agency’s priority list of hazardous substances, with arsenic, lead, and mercury in the top three spots and cadmium at number seven. While these metals are similar in that they are all toxic to children, they differ in how they cause damage and in their prevalence in baby foods. 

Arsenic is One of the Most Prevalent Heavy Metals that Contaminate Baby Food 

Inorganic arsenic is well known for its use in poisons like herbicides and pesticides but is also one of the most common dangerous heavy metals people are exposed to. This is because inorganic arsenic is a common component in many industrial processes and has contaminated many groundwater sources at high levels. Arsenic is a known carcinogen and is toxic to the body in even trace amounts when absorbed through the digestive or respiratory system. 

Lead in Baby Food Causes Autism

Ingesting lead is never good in any amount. There are many problems with lead contamination due to its use in pipes, paints, and other industrial applications. Now, many brands of baby food have been shown to contain this well-known toxic metal, and many children are now suffering from autism as a result.

The neurotoxic and carcinogenic properties of lead have been known for quite some time. Lead damages and kills cells in the body when it is ingested. What makes this worse is that lead stays in the body for a considerable amount of time, working its way into the brain and bones, where its extended half-life lasts for up to 30 years. 

Toxic Mercury in Baby Food

Another well-known poisonous metal that has been found in many brands of baby food is mercury. Mercury is well documented as a toxic substance that attacks the nervous system, digestive system, and immune system. The kidneys and liver are particularly vulnerable to poisoning from this metal, although it is also known to disrupt neurodevelopment among children exposed to it. 

Cadmium Contaminated Baby Food Affects Neurodevelopment

While cadmium is not as prevalent as the other aforementioned heavy metals, it still poses a distinct threat to children when found in baby food. Much like the other toxic heavy metals, cadmium is a neurotoxin and carcinogen that can not only poison the body in general but disrupt neurodevelopment in children. It also has a penchant for lingering in the body for years creating long-term risk for cancer and other health problems. 

Damages Inflicted by Toxic Baby Food Caused Autism

Children who consume baby food with high levels of heavy metals are at a very high risk of having to contend with significant challenges as they grow and reach adulthood. Autism can vary greatly in terms of intensity, and the symptoms exhibited, but in many cases can negatively affect social life, career opportunities, education, and more. Other negative neurodevelopmental and cognitive issues can drastically reduce a child’s potential quality of life. 

Economic Damages Caused by Baby Food Containing Heavy Metals

These losses caused by toxic baby food consumption can range greatly in both economic and non-economic terms. On one hand, the developmental issues caused by these dangerous baby food products can result in a great deal of financial strain on an affected child’s family as well as the child as they reach adulthood. Medical bills accumulated to diagnose and treat these conditions, a parent’s lost wages, specialized care expenses, as well as lost financial opportunity related to baby food-caused autism can be considered economic damages.

There are also the many non-economic damages toxic baby food-related conditions can cause. Parents can face a great deal of pain and suffering due to their children being permanently harmed by such a seemingly innocuous product. Children can experience significant mental anguish due to developmental and behavioral disorders. The decreased quality of life caused by toxic baby food can also be considered a non-economic damage.

It is because of these damages that many people have begun filing lawsuits against the aforementioned baby food companies in an attempt to not only seek fair compensation for damages but also hold these negligent companies accountable. 

Major Baby Food Manufacturers we are Targeting

The following manufacturers were found to produce baby food with heavy metal contamination.

  • Gerber
  • Beech-Nut
  • Walmart – Parent’s Choice 
  • Nurture
  • Hain Celestial Group – Earth’s Best Organic 
  • Plum Organics
  • Sprout Foods

Gerber Baby Food Lawsuit

The Gerber lawsuit alleges the defendant manufacturer knowingly sold baby foods that contain alarmingly high levels of heavy metals such as arsenic and lead. Gerber was allegedly well aware that exposure to heavy metals in baby food can lead to a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder or ADHD. 

In the aforementioned U.S. House Oversight Subcommittee report, Gerber baby food products contained used ingredients that contained 48 ppb (parts per billion) of lead. Further, the report reflects Gerber utilized rice flour with over 90 ppb of arsenic. 

The study found Gerber baby food products contained much higher levels of inorganic arsenic as compared to similar products from Beech-Nut, which exhibited high levels of heavy metals themselves. In fact, Gerber’s Organic Rice Cereal tested at an average of 65.5 ppb of inorganic arsenic

Gerber baby food autism lawsuits reference the report itself expressly stated the defendant manufacturer failed to so much as issue a recall to protect consumers. Further, the same report scolds Gerber for failing to properly and rigorously test their baby food products. 

We believe the Gerber baby food lawsuit will have a strong chance of succeeding. If we can show Gerber knew of the exceedingly high levels of lead and arsenic, it is not a stretch to prove that consuming baby food contaminated with heavy metals will result in developmental disorders. 

Gerber Baby Foods With High Levels of Heavy Metals

  • Rice Single Grain Cereal
  • Multigrain Cereal
  • Diced Carrots Veggie Pickup
  • Whole Wheat Whole Grain Cereal
  • Organic Rice Cereal
  • Arrowroot Biscuits
  • Conventional Carrots
  • Carrot Sitter 2nd Food
  • Oatmeal Single Grain Cereal
  • Organic Sweet Potatoes

Keep in mind our list of Gerber baby foods with high levels of heavy metals is not exhaustive and we will evaluate any and all products manufactured by Gerber.

Beech-Nut Baby Food Lawsuit

Beech-Nut actually recalled their Stage 1 Single Grain Rice Cereal in June of 2021. Beech-Nut’s infant rice cereal tested for much higher levels of inorganic arsenic than what is deemed safe (there truly are no safe levels for arsenic) by the FDA. We are investigating a number of baby foods manufactured by Beech-Nut on behalf of clients who claimed their child’s cumulative exposure led to a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. 

Each baby food autism lawsuit naming Beech-Nut as a defendant alleges they knew of the egregiously high levels of arsenic and lead in their baby foods yet took no remedial measures until the recall of only one specific food in 2021.

The congressional report stated that Beech-Nut Nutrition Company has placed products in the commerce stream that have high levels of mercury and cadmium. Beech-Nut Nutrition Company is one of the biggest defendants in the toxic baby food lawsuit.

How to Choose Safe Baby Food

When it comes to choosing safe baby food, parents need to be vigilant. Here are some practical tips to help ensure the food you select is safe for your little one:

  • Check ingredient lists: Always read the labels. Look for simple, organic ingredients without additives, preservatives, or artificial colors.
  • Research brands: Stick to reputable brands with a history of rigorous testing and quality control.
  • Certified organic: Opt for certified organic products whenever possible to minimize exposure to harmful pesticides and chemicals.
  • Avoid heavy metals: Some studies suggest that certain baby foods may contain heavy metals. Choose products that specifically test for and limit these contaminants.
  • Homemade options: Making your own baby food allows you to control what goes into it. Use fresh, organic produce and clean cooking utensils.
  • Batch testing: Some companies perform batch testing and provide results on their websites. Check these reports to ensure the safety of the products.
  • Storage: Store baby food in glass containers rather than plastic to avoid potential chemical leaching.
  • Stay informed: Keep up with the latest news and recalls related to baby food safety. Join parenting groups or forums for shared experiences and tips.

Testing Baby Food at Home

Making sure baby food is safe at home requires a few simple steps. To start, think about getting a home testing kit that checks for heavy metals in food. These kits come with directions and tools to collect and test samples, which can help you feel more at ease. Another option is to use a food thermometer to check that homemade baby food gets hot enough to kill any possible harmful stuff. Also, giving all fruits and veggies a good wash can help get rid of pesticides and other things on the surface.

Clean or filtered water helps reduce harmful substances in baby food. Keep your kitchen and tools clean to prevent germs from spreading. If you’re not sure about store-bought baby food, you can send it to labs for thorough checks. These steps can make you feel better about what you feed your little one.

Baby Food Autism Lawsuit Attorneys

How a Product Liability Lawyer Can Help

Many parents are now questioning the role that baby food may have played in their child’s autism diagnosis and how they can take legal action. Regardless of how you choose to go about pursuing litigation over autism caused by contaminated baby food, you must always consult with an experienced product liability attorney about your case. 

Parents or guardians of children with autism, ADHD, learning disabilities, and other health conditions that could have been caused by exposure to heavy metals in baby food should meet with a personal injury lawyer who has a proven track record of handling these types of cases.

A personal injury attorney concentrating in filing lawsuits over defective children’s products can provide essential insight and information that only years of experience can provide. That experience can significantly benefit your potential lawsuit. 

You Need an Experienced Personal Injury Lawyer to Represent Your Case

Companies such as Gerber, Walmart, Beech-Nut, Sprout, and Nurture Inc. that have been found to make and sell these dangerous products are not pulling any punches regarding their defense.

These companies have the resources to hire teams of top-caliber attorneys to help them avoid consequences for the role they played in causing potentially thousands of children to develop autism thanks to heavy metals in baby food. 

Without the assistance of an experienced personal injury lawyer, you will be facing very slim chances of seeing fair compensation for the damages you and your child have suffered. With a skilled product liability lawyer, you can level the playing field and give your case the resources and know-how essential for its success, either through a satisfactory settlement or in a trial. 

What a Product Liability Lawyer Can Do For Your Baby Food Lawsuit

The assistance provided by a product liability attorney does not extend only to legal advice and representation in court. While providing legal insight and trial representation are integral parts of this process, your lawyer will also provide-

  • Connections to expert witnesses
  • Investigation and research of your case to gather evidence
  • Conduction of discovery (the exchange of evidence and information with the defendant before a trial)
  • Calculation and determination of what damages you can seek compensation for
  • Negotiation of a settlement that covers the full extent of your damages
  • Clerical assistance with documentation

Why Choose Dolman Law Group for Your Baby Food Autism Lawsuit

Dolman Law Group has successfully assisted people across the country not only with product liability lawsuits over defective products but, specifically, products that have harmed children, such as Tylenol and baby formula. Our firm brings to the table nationally recognized and award-winning legal representation while emphasizing close client communication and service. 

Many firms are happy to take on as many of these cases as possible to make a large net profit from the sheer quantity of lawsuits they handle that may not get the full value of compensation clients need to cover their damages.

Dolman Law Group takes a quality-over-quantity approach. We take on fewer cases but can give those we represent our full, undivided attention so that they get the best legal representation possible. This has given us a wealth of positive client testimonials and a reputation as a firm that delivers results but not at the expense of sensitive and empathic service to clients. 

Do I Qualify for a Toxic Baby Food Lawsuit?

Personal Injury Lawyer and Toxic Baby Food Lawyer Matt Dolman
Matt Dolman, Baby Food Lawsuit Attorney

If you have fed your baby food from one of the aforementioned baby food brands and they have been diagnosed with developmental disorders such as autism, learning disabilities, ADHD, cognitive impairment, reduced IQ, and other issues, then you may be able to file a lawsuit against these baby food manufacturers. You cannot file a lawsuit just because you have fed your child baby food that may be contaminated with heavy metals. Your child needs to have developed some kind of medical condition tied to the consumption of these tainted products if you wish to file a lawsuit. 

Dolman Law Group provides free no-obligation consultations to those considering filing lawsuits against baby food companies over their sale of heavy-metal-contaminated products that cause autism.

Dolman Russo at the Forefront of the Baby Food Autism Lawsuits

We have been investigating claims of contaminated baby foods for the last two years and have many clients in the baby food class action lawsuit.

When it comes to cases involving harm to children due to the negligence of large companies, it is in your best interest to work with the best, most tenacious legal representation possible. We understand this is going to be a long and drawn-out fight, as the major baby food companies will not settle easily. For a free consultation, either call our office at 727-451-6900 or use our online contact form

Our toxic baby food lawyers look forward to achieving justice!