Consumers in NY Overpaid $2B in Insurance Premiums Because of Opioid Crisis, State Says
The state Department of Financial Services said it's now issued subpoenas and other document requests to more than 50 opioid companies, insurers and pharmacy benefit managers in an effort to seek restitution from the industry.
September 10, 2019 at 06:16 PM
4 minute read
New York's financial regulatory agency said Tuesday that it estimates consumers in New York have overpaid an estimated $2 billion in insurance premiums over the past decade because of the state's opioid addiction epidemic.
The state Department of Financial Services said it's now issued subpoenas and other document requests to more than 50 opioid companies, insurers and pharmacy benefit managers in an effort to seek restitution from the industry.
Requests were also made to individual members of the Sackler family, who own Purdue Pharma—the manufacturer of oxycontin that's been the subject of countless lawsuits over the opioid epidemic.
State officials from New York claimed Tuesday that misrepresentations about the safety of opioids by the industry has led to more of those drugs being prescribed than necessary, as well as more people seeking treatment for addiction and other associated adverse health effects.
That's driven up insurance premiums for consumers in New York to the tune of $2 billion, Gov. Andrew Cuomo and DFS Superintendent Linda Lacewell said.
"Any intentional misrepresentation by the manufacturers and distributors of opioids and PBMs would have led to great financial burden for consumers and New York state-licensed health insurers," Lacewell said. "DFS is charged with oversight of New York's insurance industry and rate review for consumers and express authority to investigate insurance fraud."
DFS is now planning to seek fines and restitution from the opioid industry, and is directing state-regulated insurers to fully cooperate with those actions. The agency will also hold hearings across the state on how the opioid crisis has affected the health insurance system.
The New York Health Plan Association, a trade group that represents some of the insurers targeted through the action, said its members are discussing how to best provide the state with the information that's been requested.
"HPA and our member plans share the concerns expressed by the governor and the department about the opioid crisis' effect on New Yorkers," said Eric Linzer, president of NYHPA. "We are currently having discussions with the department about its information request to ensure that plans are able to provide the necessary data for this review."
Pharmacy benefit managers are a new focus for the state's investigation into the opioid industry. The Legislature approved a bill earlier this year requiring them, for the first time, to regularly register with DFS.
The agency said it's recently received information that some pharmacy benefit managers may have been paid rebates by opioid manufacturers, wholesalers and distributors in exchange for placing those drugs in prescription tiers with lower co-pays.
Under certain circumstances, that can violate federal and state health insurance regulations, DFS claimed.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who announced the action Tuesday, said the state was taking action for consumers because the financial damage caused was allegedly intentional on the part of the opioid industry.
"The opioid scandal, the opioid scheme, is as diabolical, as brazen, as obnoxious and as offensive as anything I have seen," Cuomo said. "They knew what they were doing. This was not accidental."
The announcement builds on other action taken against the opioid industry by New York, including a lawsuit from the New York Attorney General's Office against opioid manufacturers and distributors in the commercial division of Suffolk County Supreme Court.
That litigation, which was among the first to target distributors alongside manufacturers, is ongoing. It's separate from a massive collection of lawsuits currently being hashed out against companies in the opioid industry as part of a multidistrict litigation in Ohio.
READ MORE:
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 AllCourt System Names New Administrative Judges for New York City Courts in Leadership Shakeup
3 minute readRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
In Eric Adams Case and Other Corruption Matters, Prosecutors Seem Bent on Pushing Boundaries of Their Already Awesome Power
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Remote Proceedings: A Gift for the Holidays
- 2Contested Engineer Cleared to Testify in Defective Pistol Suit, Federal Judge Rules
- 3How I Made Partner: 'Don’t Be Scared to Be Ambitious,' Says Aya Eguchi of Morrison Foerster
- 4People in the News—Dec. 18, 2024—Faegre Drinker, Antheil Maslow
- 5'We've Got a Good Thing Here in Delaware': Glasscock Reflects on Rewards of Equity Work, Clerks and the Delaware Way
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