Insys Therapeutics founder John Kapoor, center, departs federal court in Boston on Jan. 30, 2019. (AP Photo/Steven Senne)Law Firms Dominate Opioid Maker's Creditors as Weil Takes Counsel Role for Insys
Weil Gotshal is representing opiate manufacturer Insys, whose bankruptcy petition lists nearly $20 million in unsecured claims from 22 law firms.
June 12, 2019 at 03:15 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
UPDATE, Thursday, June 13: A representative for Wilkinson Walsh + Eskovitz said in a statement Thursday that the firm had been incorrectly listed as an unsecured creditor of Insys Therapeutics in the company's June 10 Chapter 11 petition, and that it is not a creditor or participant in the bankruptcy. The original filing, the representative said, “incorrectly lists Wilkinson Walsh + Eskovitz LLP as a creditor on an indemnification claim stemming from our representation of Dr. John Kapoor. As we informed Insys's counsel, the correct creditor for the indemnification claim is Dr. Kapoor, since he timely and personally paid all portions of our fees that Insys has failed to indemnify to date.”
Efforts by ALM to reach Insys's counsel at Weil, Gotshal & Manges on Thursday afternoon were unsuccessful, and the court docket had not been updated to reflect any changes to the unsecured creditor list that was filed on Monday. Our original report appears below.
Wilkinson Walsh + Eskovitz, King & Spalding and Nixon Peabody are among a long list of law firms named as creditors by Insys Therapeutics, the first drug company to seek bankruptcy protection over liabilities tied to its opioid sales.
Insys, a Chandler, Arizona-headquartered pharmaceutical company that is best known for a spray version of fentanyl, an opioid medication, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy Monday, tapping a team from Weil, Gotshal & Manges led by restructuring practice co-chairman Gary Holtzer, along with Delaware counsel at Richards, Layton & Finger led by Mark Collins.
The Delaware filing came more than a week after a federal jury convicted Insys' founder and four members of its leadership team of a racketeering conspiracy centered on bribing doctors to prescribe the highly addictive painkiller to cancer patients.
For a company that claims its fentanyl product Subsys represented just a tiny slice of the opioid market—0.0283% of opioid prescriptions at its height in 2015—Insys has created an outsized share of legal work tied to the opioid crisis.
In addition to the federal criminal convictions of its founders and former leadership, multiple attorneys general have taken Insys and other pharmaceutical companies to court in efforts to hold the drugmakers responsible for the opioid epidemic. Patients prescribed the drug who have become addicted have also sued Insys.
In the federal kickbacks prosecution, Wilkinson Walsh's Beth Wilkinson represented convicted Insys founder John Kapoor, along with lawyers at Nixon Peabody, Ropes & Gray, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison and Nardello & Co. Creditors who provided services to Kapoor said they are owed a combined $11.65 million.
King & Spalding and Hogan Lovells represented former Insys CEO Michael Babich, and the firms have unsecured claims in the bankruptcy of a combined $2.5 million. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan has a claim for $282,000 related to its representation of former chairman Steven Meyer and board member Pierre Lapalme. A Boston firm, Miner Orkand Siddall, said it is owed more than $380,000 for providing counsel to Mike Gurry, a former Insys vice president. Katten Muchin Rosenman and Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler also have claims related to representing an Insys manager and board member, respectively.
Of the company's 30 largest unsecured creditors, more than two-thirds are law firms, and most are Am Law 100 firms. Four of the firms have listed claims of more than $1 million: Wilkinson Walsh is listed with a claim of more than $8 million; King & Spalding claims $2 million; and Nixon Peabody and White & Case each show claims of more than $1 million.
In total, 22 firms have unsecured claims ranging from $8.9 million to $110,000:
- Wilkinson Walsh + Eskovitz
- King & Spalding
- Nixon Peabody
- White & Case
- Cravath, Swaine & Moore
- Paul Hastings
- Ropes & Gray
- Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison
- DLA Piper
- Holland & Knight
- Miner Orkand Siddall
- Carlton Fields
- Hogan Lovells
- Nardello & Co.
- Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan
- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
- Katten Muchin Rosenman
- Shook, Hardy & Bacon
- Covington & Burling
- K&L Gates
- Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler
- Marino, Tortorella & Boyle
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
FTC Lauds Withdrawal of Proposed Indiana Hospitals Merger After Leaning on State Regulators
4 minute read
New Class Action Points to Fears Over Privacy, Abortions and Fertility
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
