Critical Mass: The Opioid Case: What the Jury Would Have Heard, What's Next, and is a Global Settlement Around the Corner?
It's been quite the week for lawsuits over opioids.
October 23, 2019 at 03:41 PM
6 minute read
Welcome to Critical Mass, Law.com's weekly briefing for class action and mass tort attorneys. It's been quite the week for lawsuits over opioids. First, talks over a potential $48 billion global settlement broke down on Friday. Then, there was the first jury trial over the opioid crisis that, well, didn't happen. Instead, AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health and McKesson, the three major distributors of opiate pharmaceuticals, and one manufacturer, Teva Pharmaceuticals, agreed to a $260 million settlement with two Ohio counties just hours before opening statements on Monday. Later that day, Pennsylvania's AG announced the $48 billion deal went through—this time, without all the cities and counties on board. I was in Cleveland on Monday and talked to some of the lawyers who were there. For this week's Critical Mass, I've got more on what's happening with the opioid cases. As always, please feel free to email me at [email protected], or follow me on Twitter: @abronstadlaw.
What Jurors Were Going to Hear
I spoke with Mark Lanier (The Lanier Law Firm), who really wanted to talk about the opening statement he had planned for Monday's opioid trial. He told me he was on "four hours a night" of sleep for the past month. After a quick celebration of his 59th birthday on Sunday in Houston, he flew out to Cleveland, where he went over the 150 slides with his trial team at the Ritz Carlton.
"I was ready to go," Lanier told me.
He said the judge had cautioned that Lanier's planned opening of 2 hours and 15 minutes might bore the jurors. Emboldened to prove him wrong, Lanier assembled a presentation, complete with images of poppy flowers and Cleveland highway signs, to show how the road to opioid addiction dated back to 1823. He told me:
"I wanted the jury to understand the opioid epidemic shouldn't surprise anyone. This was nothing new."
He even had props: a first edition of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz from 1900 and an ancient Sumerian opioid jug.
Late Sunday night, the defendants filed a motion in limine to bar plaintiffs' lawyers from making "inflammatory and prejudicial statements during opening statements to the jury." Why? Because, they said, Lanier had compared them to "bank robbers" during voir dire.
"Give me a break," Lanier told me on Monday. It's the "classic example" used in law school to describe an alleged conspiracy, he said.
So, What Happens Next?
Monday's opioid settlement does not end the opioid litigation, of course. In fact, the settlement doesn't even resolve the case brought by the two Ohio counties, Cuyahoga and Summit.
That case named as many as 23 defendants at one point and, while some of them settled, a handful of others did not. U.S. District Judge Dan Polster, the judge overseeing the multidistrict litigation, had severed the other defendants from Monday's trial. Plaintiffs' lawyers in the MDL told me the plan is to set a new trial date against those defendants, possibly sometime next year.
On Monday, Polster added one more defendant to that future trial, Walgreens, which wasn't part of the $260 million settlement. That's a big deal, Paul Hanly (Simmons Hanly Conroy) told me. Why? The other defendants are small companies, he said, but Walgreens has "a lot of money."
There's also another trial planned, potentially next summer, in a case brought by Cabell County, West Virginia, and the city of Huntington, West Virginia. Hanly told me that his co-lead counsel Paul Farrell (Greene Ketchum), who is in Huntington, plans to focus on that trial, as will Motley Rice, which represents the city of Huntington.
Although that won't be in Cleveland, Hanly said Polster has the authority to oversee that trial, too.
Could A Global Settlement Still Happen?
With the pressure of trial looming, Polster oversaw last-minute talks over a potential global settlement on Friday. The proposed $18 billion deal with the three distributors—later upped to $48 billion when adding Johnson & Johnson and Teva—was designed to resolve more than 2,600 opioid lawsuits across the nation. Even more important, state AGs, whose cases are in state court and not part of the MDL, were at the negotiation table.
But Hanly told me they were never that close to sealing the deal, which was "sprang on us by four AGs."
"Joe and I didn't know anything about it," he said, referring to his co-lead Joe Rice (Motley Rice).
In Cleveland, lawyers told me it wasn't enough money (Rice said more than half of the global settlement proposal was based on the estimated value of treatment drugs.) They also said the cash would have been distributed over several years—not right away.
Still, Hanley was optimistic his team would renew talks over a global deal, with additional discussions possible in person during the next few weeks.
Then, hours later on Monday, Pennsylvania AG Josh Shapiro announced that his state and three others had reached a $48 billion "agreement in principle" with the same five opioid companies involved in Friday's talks. But it's not quite a done deal: "Our work here is not done—we have to bring other states, counties, and cities on board with this framework," Shapiro said.
But the MDL lawyers said they still aren't on board.
In a statement, they said: "This appears to be the same proposal that 17 municipalities rejected on Friday, and we don't see that changing."
Here's what's happening in other news:
Juul Joust: A diverse set of about 50 lawyers are vying for lead roles in the multidistrict litigation against e-cigarette maker Juul Labs. Some are taking the job personally, saying they have family members affected by the vaping epidemic. About half the lawyers make up a proposed leadership group that has at least 22 people, including 10 women and three minority attorneys.
Skadden Adds: Weil Gotshal partner Allison Brown, who has defended Johnson & Johnson in several talcum powder trials, has joined Skadden Arps. Brown scored defense verdicts in New Jersey in March and October 2018. Her other clients include Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Bausch & Lomb and Philip Morris.
The Judge Did What? Johnson & Johnson has moved to recuse the judge who oversaw a Risperdal trial that ended in an $8 billion punitive damages verdict. Why? Because, according to Johnson & Johnson lawyers at Patterson Belknap and Drinker Biddle, Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Kenneth Powell high-fived some jurors and posed for photographs with them.
Thanks for reading Critical Mass. I'll see you next week!
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
© 2025 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 AllTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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