SHERIDAN, WYOMING - December 8, 2025 - Investors in Perrigo Company plc (NYSE: PRGO) are weighing next steps after The Schall Law Firm announced a putative securities class action alleging the consumer healthcare company misled the market about the condition and turnaround costs of the baby formula business it acquired from Nestlé. The case highlights ongoing governance and disclosure risk around carved-out assets in regulated consumer categories.
Allegations Center on Underinvestment in Nestlé Baby Formula Business
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of investors who purchased Perrigo securities between February 27, 2025 and November 4, 2025, claims the company misrepresented the state of its acquired infant formula operations. According to the complaint, "The baby formula business Perrigo acquired from Nestlé suffered from serious underinvestment in repairs, maintenance, and operational optimization. The Company would be required to make large investments and expenditures beyond the cost estimates it shared with investors to fix the baby formula business's problems. Based on these facts, the Company's public statements were false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the truth about Perrigo, investors suffered damages."
For institutional shareholders and analysts, the core issue is whether Perrigo adequately diligenced and communicated the capital and operational remediation required to stabilize the asset, and how these dynamics were reflected in its forward-looking guidance and risk disclosures.
Class Period and Key Dates for PRGO Shareholders
The proposed class includes investors who bought Perrigo shares between February 27 and November 4, 2025, inclusive. The Schall Law Firm is encouraging shareholders who suffered losses in that window to contact the firm by January 16, 2026, the current deadline for investors seeking to act as lead plaintiff.
At this stage, the class has not yet been certified by the court. Until certification occurs, no investor is formally represented by counsel in the matter, and shareholders who take no action will remain absent class members if and when a class is certified. For corporate issuers and boards, the case is a reminder that acquisition-related disclosure cycles-from deal announcement through integration-are now routinely scrutinized by specialist securities firms looking for misalignments between narrative and subsequent performance.
Why the Case Matters for M&A Disclosure and Risk
Beyond Perrigo, the allegations underscore broader risk in transactions where acquirers inherit assets emerging from long periods of underinvestment or operational stress. If remediation costs and timelines materially exceed what is communicated to the market, plaintiffs' firms can argue that investors were deprived of key information needed to assess deal economics, margin trajectories and balance sheet risk.
For CFOs, general counsel and investor relations teams, this reinforces the need for:
- Conservative assumptions around capex and operational turnarounds in external guidance
- Clear disclosure of known infrastructure, maintenance and compliance gaps in acquired plants or product lines
- Aligned messaging between regulatory filings, earnings calls and internal integration plans
In heavily regulated segments like infant nutrition, quality, safety and plant readiness carry disproportionate financial and reputational consequences, making transparency around inherited risk especially critical.
Shareholder Rights and Litigation Strategy Considerations
On the investor side, institutions must decide whether to remain passive class members, seek lead-plaintiff status or pursue separate strategies. Lead plaintiffs can influence litigation strategy and settlement discussions, but also assume additional responsibilities. Specialist firms such as The Schall Law Firm frame these cases as tools to recover losses and pressure boards to improve disclosure and risk governance.
For Perrigo and its peers, the action will likely be monitored as a bellwether for how courts view alleged under-disclosure of integration and remediation costs in consumer health and nutrition deals. Outcomes may inform future disclosure practices and board-level oversight of large asset acquisitions.
Investors seeking more information on the Perrigo class action and their participation options can visit www.schallfirm.com.