Law Center Search Results

On August 7, 2026, the NAM filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse a problematic state court ruling that allows plaintiffs to sue corporate defendants in unpredictable jurisdictions. Mead Johnson v. Toles, et al. is a class action filed in St. Clair County, Illinois—a notoriously plaintiff-friendly jurisdiction. The class of plaintiffs includes thousands of parents with infant children living in all 50 states. They claim that Mead Johnson’s infant formula caused their children to develop a certain intestinal disease. Mead Johnson is a Delaware company, headquartered in Indiana, that sells infant formula around the country. Its only connection to Illinois is that its headquarters were located there from 2009-2017. Our amicus brief argues that plaintiffs cannot sue companies in any jurisdiction of their choosing. Companies order their corporate affairs, including the location of their incorporation and headquarters, for specific reasons. One of these reasons is often to eliminate the uncertainty of where to expect litigation. It is well-established in the law that companies may only be sued in the states where they incorporate or base their operations. The Supreme Court should reaffirm this principle and prevent plaintiffs from “forum shopping” for a favorable court.