New York Opioid Trial Ends With Verdict in Favor of Plaintiffs, Jury Finds Drug Companies Caused Public Nuisance
The jury began deliberating on Dec. 14 after hearing more than five months of testimony presented by the government plaintiffs and the defendants.
December 30, 2021 at 01:15 PM
4 minute read
PharmaceuticalsA Suffolk County jury on Thursday ruled in favor of New York state and the Long Island counties in the state's long-running opioid trial, finding that a group of drug companies created a public nuisance through their role in the opioid crisis. But the jurors also answered "yes" to a question on the verdict sheet about whether New York state itself contributed to the public nuisance in the state, assigning 10% of responsibility to the state with the remaining 90% distributed among the drug companies. The jury answered "no" to the question of whether Nassau and Suffolk counties contributed to the public nuisance in those two jurisdictions. The amount of damages owed by those found responsible has yet to be determined. Napoli Shkolnik partner Hunter Shkolnik, who represents Nassau County, said Thursday that the number could be in the tens or even hundreds of billions. The jury began deliberating on Dec. 14 after hearing more than five months of testimony presented by the government plaintiffs and the defendants. Several people involved with the trial said they had been told it may have set a record as New York's longest. "It's somewhat of a miracle that we kept a jury here for six months," Suffolk County Supreme Court Justice Jerry Garguilo said Thursday. Garguilo noted that the trial extended through "all four seasons," and post-trial proceedings are set to last into the spring, according to a schedule discussed after the verdict was read Thursday. An application for a mistrial by the defendants is still pending. Attorneys for the plaintiffs immediately praised the ruling Thursday, with Shkolnik and Simmons Hanly Conroy shareholder Jayne Conroy, who represents Suffolk County, describing it as a "massive victory" in a joint statement. "Our work continues, as we now move onto the damages phase, where we will continue to fight to make sure Long Island and New York State get the resources they need to fund the abatement, treatment and recovery programs necessary to fully address the opioid crisis," Conroy and Shkolnik said. During a news conference Thursday afternoon, Conroy and Shkolnik emphasized that the Long Island trial was unique because companies involved in every part of the opioid supply chain were named as defendants. "What we undertook in New York and I think a lot of people thought was impossible was literally … we took on everybody in one trial, which hadn't happened yet, it's been more piecemeal," Shkolnik said. "Manufacturers, distributors, pharmacies -- we chose to take them on all at once." New York Attorney General Letitia James also praised the verdict and its significance for families and communities affected by the opioid crisis in a statement Thursday. "Teva Pharmaceuticals USA and others misled the American people about the true dangers of opioids, which is why, in 2019, I made a promise that our team would hold them and the other manufacturers and distributors responsible for the opioid epidemic accountable for the suffering that they have caused," she said. Morgan Lewis & Bockius represents Teva Pharmaceuticals and affiliated companies, while Foley & Lardner represents Anda Inc., the only other remaining defendant in the suit. Counsel for the defendants did not immediately respond to requests for comment Thursday. The defense attorneys said during closing arguments that the plaintiffs failed to prove their pharmaceutical companies substantially contributed to the opioid crisis, arguing that the plaintiffs' lawyers tried to blur the lines between the remaining defendants and larger companies no longer involved in the case. The opioid lawsuit originally named a roster of major drug companies as defendants, including Purdue Pharma, AmerisourceBergen and Johnson & Johnson. But the bankruptcies of Purdue and a handful of other defendants led to their removal from the case, and settlements shrunk the list further. Johnson & Johnson agreed to pay more than $250 million as part of a settlement reached on the eve of opening arguments in June, and McKesson Corp., Cardinal Health Inc. and AmerisourceBergen Drug Corp. reached a $1.1 billion settlement the following month. Those agreements were followed by a $50 million settlement with Endo International in September and a $200 million settlement with Allergan Finance announced the morning closing arguments began. The bulk of the settlement money is set to go toward opioid treatment, prevention and education programs in New York, with New York Attorney General Letitia James noting that while "no amount of money will ever make up for the thousands who lost their lives or became addicted to opioids" in New York, the money will help "prevent future devastation."
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.
Related Stories
View AllYou Might Like
View AllMajor Drug Companies Agree to Pay $49.1 Million to 50 States, Territories
3 minute readLawsuit Alleging $23 Million Contract Breach Against Biogen Moves Forward
Bristol-Myers Squibb Wins Dismissal of $6.4 Billion Lawsuit Alleging Intentional Delay of Cancer Drug
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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