AbbVie Sued for Corporate Docs Related to Alleged Kickback Scheme
The filing claimed that senior officers and directors had allowed the firm to illegally promote Humira by offering doctors benefits in exchange for prescribing the drug.
May 06, 2019 at 03:49 PM
4 minute read
An investor in AbbVie Inc. has sued the pharmaceutical company in Delaware Chancery Court to investigate an alleged kickback scheme that boosted sales of its popular immunosuppressant Humira and potentially exposed the company to more than $6 billion in legal liability.
The 28-page filing, filed May 3, claimed that senior officers and directors had allowed the firm to illegally promote Humira, which is used to treat rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease and other inflammatory conditions, by offering doctors benefits in exchange for prescribing the drug.
According to the complaint, Humira executives instituted a system of providing incentives to doctors in exchange for prescribing the medication, and created “ambassador ” positions to interact directly with patients and keep them on the drug, which has been linked to increased risks of fatal infections and certain cancers.
Meanwhile, the company's management authorized more than $10 billion in stock buybacks that benefited only company insiders, at a time when AbbVie's business had taken a downturn, lawyers for plaintiff Lori Geare said in the filing.
“ There is a credible basis to believe that directors and senior officers at AbbVie may have breached their fiduciary duties by ignoring or failing to oversee, monitor, or mediate violations of law in the marketing of Humira,” attorneys from Grant & Eisenhofer and the Paskowitz Law Firm wrote.
North Chicago, Illinois-based AbbVie's press office did not immediately respond Monday to a call seeking comment on the lawsuit.
According to the complaint, executive compensation at AbbVie was tied “directly” to sales of Humira, which generated $19.9 billion in revenue last year, and prompted management to “focus disproportionately” on promoting the product.
The attorneys said that AbbVie provided doctors “traditional” kickbacks, such as cash, meals and other gifts, as well as “more sophisticated forms” that included offers of marketing assistance and free insurance processing services. AbbVie, they said, also offered product “ambassadors” with nursing backgrounds, who were trained to visit patients' homes and downplay the risks of Humira in order to keep them on the drug.
The nurses also helped doctor's offices with handling insurance authorizations and claim processing, so long as physicians continued to proscribe the drug, the complaint said.
The alleged scheme caught the attention of authorities in 2015, when a whistleblower filed a false claims case against AbbVie in California federal court. Since then, the state of California has launched an investigation into AbbVie's marketing practices for Humira, and the California Department of Insurance in 2018 sued the company, alleging that it had defrauded the state to the tune of $1.2 billion.
According to the complaint, the AbbVie board failed in its duty to monitor how its drug was being marketed, and instead allowed the company to proceed with an aggressive stock buyback program, which resulted in 109 million shares being repurchased at a price of $10.7 billion last year.
At the time, the filing said, AbbVie's executives and directors knew that the company was experiencing its “worst quarter ever,” amid a slowdown in Humira sales and growing competition in Europe. Just weeks after the buybacks closed, AbbVie lowered its European sales forecasts and at the end of October, its stock dropped to $77.85 per share from the $103 buyback price, representing a $1.8 billion decline.
Attorneys said the stock, which is currently trading around $81 per share, has yet to significantly rebound.
“These events raise a reasonable suspicion that the buyback was undertaken to support the stock price so that the executives might benefit (in 2018 or in the long term) and/or to mask weakness in AbbVie's competitive position,” the complaint said. “This matter plainly warrants investigation, as to how the buyback was approved and upon what information, so that the stockholders may be protected.”
Geare is represented by Michael J. Barry, Christine Mackintosh and Rebecca A. Musarra of Grant & Eisenhofer in Wilmington and Laurence Paskowitz of the Paskowitz Law Firm in Hartford, Connecticut.
An online docket-tracking service did not list counsel for AbbVie.
The case, captioned Geare v. AbbVie, has not yet been assigned to a judge.
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 AllDefending Against a $290M Claim and Scoring a $116M Win in Del. Drug Patent Fight
Wilson Sonsini Knocks Out Claims Against Inhibrx Biosciences in Trade Secrets Verdict
Chancery Again Rules in Plaintiff's Favor in Earnout Provision Dispute
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
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