Oklahoma AG Settles Opioid Suit Against Purdue Pharma for $270 Million
The reports come a day after the Oklahoma Supreme Court denied the company's efforts to delay what would have been the first trial focusing on the opioid manufacturer's conduct.
March 26, 2019 at 11:05 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The Oklahoma attorney general and Purdue Pharma have agreed to a $270 million settlement to resolve claims that the company played a major role in creating the nationwide opioid crisis.
The announcement Tuesday from Oklahoma Attorney General Michael Hunter comes several weeks after news broke that Purdue was exploring bankruptcy to address its growing liabilities over the opioid epidemic.
During a press conference Tuesday, Hunter said the money will provide funding for treatment across the state and nationally.
“We are out of time with regard to the responsibility we have to deal with this crisis,” Hunter said.
According to Hunter, the settlement will provide $125 million to the Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Center for Wellness & Recovery, with an additional $15 million annually for the next five years, to establish an endowment fund. Hunter said an additional $12 million will go directly toward abatement efforts in towns and municipalities across the Sooner State.
The company will also pay $60 million to offset legal costs, Hunter said Tuesday.
The settlement was also announced the day after the Oklahoma Supreme Court denied the company's efforts to delay what is set to be the first trial focusing on claims that opioid makers played a key role in oversupplying and overprescribing the opioid drugs. A Chapter 11 filing would halt the lawsuits, folding them into bankruptcy court. Purdue then sought to delay the trial until September, citing a “belated tidal wave of documents.”
The trial is still scheduled to begin May 28 in Oklahoma.
Hunter said Tuesday there would be court-ordered mediation in the coming weeks, but his office would continue to prepare for trial.
“We're ready to go to trial today,” Hunter said.
The opioid cases name dozens of companies and individuals with varying alleged roles in the crisis, from drug manufacturers and distributors to doctors and clinics. Counties have spearheaded the opioid cases.
The case, filed in 2017, alleged that Purdue and two other opioid manufacturers, Johnson & Johnson's Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, helped create an epidemic over the prescription painkillers by marketing them as a safe and nonaddictive treatment for chronic pain.
The case alleges that Purdue—and, more specifically, its private owners, the Sackler family—created the epidemic when they introduced OxyContin in 1996.
More than 1,600 cases are pending in a consolidated federal litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, with Judge Dan Polster overseeing things.
Purdue's lawyers in the case are Sanford Coats of Crowe & Dunlevy in Oklahoma City and Mark Cheffo, a partner in Dechert's New York office.
A spokesman for Purdue did not return a call seeking comment.
Neither Teva attorney Robert McCampbell of GableGotwals in Oklahoma City, nor Johnson & Johnson's lawyer, Benjamin Odom of Odom Sparks & Jones in Norman, Oklahoma, responded to a request for comment.
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
Litigators of the Week: A Trade Secret Win at the ITC for Viking Over Promising Potential Liver Drug
Litigation Leaders: Mark Jones of Nelson Mullins on Helping Clients Assemble ‘Dream Teams’
Litigators of the Week: An Early Knockout Win in the Decongestant MDL
Litigators of the Week: The Delaware Supreme Court Turns Its Spotlight on Advance Notice Bylaws
Trending Stories
- 1Aging Condo Neglect Leads to $1M Payout in Miami Beach Slip and Fall
- 2‘BiT Global Lost’: Federal Judge Won’t Stop Coinbase From Delisting wBTC Token
- 3Some Elite Universities Favor Wealthy Students in Admissions Decisions, Lawsuit Alleges
- 4Judge Asks: Should Tom Girardi Serve Sentence in a Medical Facility or Behind Bars?
- 5EPA grants California authority to ban sales of new gas cars by 2035. Action faces reversal by Trump
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
