Ohio Jury Finds CVS, Walmart and Walgreens Liable for Opioids Crisis in 2 Counties
Damages will be determined by the trial judge after later hearings.
November 23, 2021 at 03:25 PM
6 minute read
Class ActionsThe first jury to weigh in on the opioid crisis found three pharmacy chains liable Tuesday for addiction and drug abuse that has ravaged two Ohio counties, determining the retailers recklessly distributed massive amounts of pain killers.
Federal jurors in Cleveland found CVS, Walmart and Walgreens liable for public nuisance claims that seek abatement funds to pay for addiction treatment and other resources. Damages have not yet been determined. The trial judge, U.S. District Senior Judge Dan Polster of the Northern District of Ohio, will decide that during later hearings.
In a Zoom press conference after the verdict, lead trial counsel Mark Lanier said he plans to ask for $1.1 billion and $1.3 billion for the counties, though he didn't specify which.
"Should the judge find in favor of those numbers or whatever numbers he assigns, I'd love to say that the money will be disbursed and the problem will be abated and we will see thriving communities overnight. But regrettably, that won't be the case," Lanier said. "We expect that the companies will appeal these decisions; that they will appeal them all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And that's a process that can take years."
Lanier's co counsel, Peter Weinberger of Spangenberg Shibley & Liber LLP, said the damages phase is to begin in early April or early May, with Polster setting aside nine trial days to hear evidence.
"We have health economists, we have epidemiologists, we have people who have come into Lake and Turnbull counties and evaluated what it is in terms of programs that are necessary to provide treatment for addiction alternative medical treatment, education to the communities, help with foster care help with judicial system.
Weinberger said they know the numbers sound large, but they know they need long-term funding for a long-term solution.
"This is not just something that you throw money at today or for the next six months or for a year," Weinberger said.
Tuesday's verdict follows a bench trial in Orange County, California, that ended with a tentative defense verdict, and it comes on the heels of the Oklahoma Supreme Court tossing a $465 million judgment against Johnson & Johnson over public nuisance claims brought by the state's attorney general.
This content has been archived.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 AllPharmacies Accuse GoodRx of 'Inviting Price-Fixing' in Series of Antitrust Class Actions
4 minute read'We're Back': Fourth Circuit Considers Certification of Marriott Data Breach Class ... Again
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Business Breakups: Why Business and Commercial Cases Are Well-Suited to Mediation
- 2Prosecutors Drop Charges Against Ex-Miami Commissioner and Attorney
- 3Pennsylvania Modernizes Trust Administration With New Directed Trust Statute
- 4Farella Hires Former AUSA, Jan. 6 Prosecutor
- 5Dougherty Jury Returns $2M Verdict
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