Judge Tosses Lawsuit Alleging Nondisclosure of Rift Between Pharmacy Benefits Firm, Health Insurer
A federal judge in New York on Tuesday dismissed a derivative lawsuit that accused directors of the country's largest pharmacy benefits manager of hiding from investors its troubled relationship with health insurance giant Anthem Inc.
January 25, 2018 at 02:16 PM
3 minute read
Anthem Blue Cross & Blue Shield/Wellpoint in Richmond, Virginia. September 19, 2015. Photo by Diego M. Radzinschi
A federal judge in New York on Tuesday dismissed a derivative lawsuit that accused directors of the country's largest pharmacy benefits manager of hiding from investors its troubled relationship with health insurance giant Anthem Inc.
In a 19-page unpublished opinion, U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos of the Southern District of New York said the complaint, filed by the trustees of a West Virginia-based pension fund, had not identified any material misstatements by the board, which would have exposed Express Scripts Holding Co. directors to personal liability in the case.
The ruling came just months after the Ramos decision, in August, that rejected similar claims in a federal securities action, saying there was no evidence to support allegations that board members had failed to disclose to investors that Express Scripts was in danger of losing an important contract with its biggest client.
In the derivative case, plaintiffs pointed to a series of regulatory filings, investor calls and press releases that, they said, painted an overly optimistic picture of Express Scripts' working relationship with Anthem, even as the two companies were mired in deep disagreements over pricing and Express Scripts' ability to follow through on a 2009 pharmacy benefits management agreement.
According to the pension-fund trustees, Express Scripts directors knew by December 2015 that Anthem had accused Express Scripts of breaching the agreement, but still told investors that the partnership remained strong.
The directors countered that the plaintiffs had engaged in group pleading and denied that any of the statements had in fact been misleading. Because none of the directors faced the threat of personal liability, they said, the case should be dismissed for failing to make a pre-suit demand that the board consider filing its own litigation.
In his opinion, Ramos said that none of the statements cited by plaintiffs rose to the level of material misstatements. Rather, he said, they reflected the kind of optimism and “puffery” that is too vague to be under Delaware law.
“Here, plaintiffs have largely only offered allegations that Express Scripts should have been more candid about the Anthem relationship in its SEC filings, not that Express Scripts' statements regarding risks in its SEC filings was, itself, untrue,” Ramos wrote.
“For the same reasons as stated in the securities opinion, then, the court finds that plaintiffs cannot show demand futility by pointing to these statements in Express Scripts' SEC filings, which discuss general risks and state that Express Scripts was renegotiating with Anthem without delving into further detail about the exact dispute between the parties.”
Ramos, however, dismissed the case without prejudice, giving the plaintiffs the opportunity to file an amended complaint.
Attorneys for both sides were not immediately available to comment on Thursday.
The plaintiffs were represented by Benny C. Goodman III, Erik W. Luedeke and Samuel H. Rudman of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd.
The director defendants were represented by Jay B. Kasner, Scott D. Musoff, Michael C. Griffin, Paul J. Lockwood and Jenness E. Parker of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.
The case was captioned Brewer v. Breen.
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 AllDOJ: TD Bank Agrees to Pay $3B Over Anti-Money Laundering Program Violations
2 minute readCleary Creates Nonequity Partner Tier, Calling for 'Innovation and Adaptation'
5 minute readUS Judge Sets May Trial Date for Sean Combs as Defense Fends Off 'Damning' Tape
200 Hrs. of Partner Prep Guides Quinn Emanuel's Incredibly Detailed Mock Bankruptcy Trial
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
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