Heroin Fentanyl pills.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court has ruled that the estate of a man who died from an overdose of fentanyl, obtained by a friend posing as a patient, cannot sue the pharmacy that filled the prescription.

In Albert v. Sheeley's Drug Store, a three-judge appellate panel consisting of Judges Anne Lazarus, Victor Stabile and Alice Dubow affirmed the Lackawanna County court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant Sheeley's Drug Store.

The Superior Court held that because decedent Cody Albert was a part of co-defendant Zachary Ross' plot to acquire fentanyl—prescribed to his mother for her cancer treatment—for recreational use, Albert's estate could not recover.

Albert's estate argued that ingesting controlled substances is not illegal and that Albert didn't play a role in Ross' fraud, according to Stabile's June 30 opinion. The court disagreed.

"Decedent had a history of abusing drugs together with Ross. On the day of decedent's death, Ross telephoned Sheeley's and ordered fentanyl by pretending to be his mother, who had a prescription for fentanyl due to her bout with multiple myeloma," Stabile said. "Decedent and Ross communicated about Ross's need to get to the pharmacy by 9:00 to obtain this prescription. Decedent then drove Ross to Sheeley's and waited in the car while Ross obtained the fentanyl inside the pharmacy. This evidence demonstrates that decedent took part in Ross's scheme to obtain this deadly controlled substance."

According to Stabile, Ross and Albert then traveled to Ross' house, where Albert ingested a fentanyl patch and fell asleep on the couch in Ross' living room. Later that night, Ross attempted to wake Albert up, but he did not respond and was pronounced dead at the hospital.

"Several additional facts deserve mention," Stabile said. "In the months leading up to the decedent's death, Ross and the decedent frequently ingested OxyContin and marijuana. One week before the decedent's death, he told Ross that he was experiencing withdrawal symptoms from opiates. The decedent referred to himself as 'just a fuckin[g] drug addict with no money.'"

Stabile also reiterated the illegality of possessing a controlled substance without a prescription.

"No court will lend its aid to a man who grounds his actions upon an immoral or illegal act," Stabile said. "By participating in the scheme to obtain the fentanyl, and by illegally possessing the fentanyl at Ross's house … the decedent was 'an active, voluntary participant in the wrongful conduct or transaction(s) for which [appellant] seeks redress' and 'bear[s] substantially equal or greater responsibility for the underlying illegality as compared to [Sheeley's].'"

The plaintiff's attorney, Michael Shaffer of Shaffer & Gaier, disagreed with the court's stance on substance addiction.

"In essence, the court found that the ingestion of fentanyl constituted an 'immoral or illegal act.' It is my belief that the court stretched this doctrine to an area, drug addiction, that is wholly misplaced in today's society," Shaffer said. "While the decedent may have been a troubled college student, his drug use on this on this one particular occasion should not have acted as an absolute bar to recovery."

Sheeley's is represented by Gregory Kunkle of Thomas, Thomas & Hafer, who said, "We are appreciative that the Superior Court made the correct legal determination. But, to be sure, there is no cause for celebration in light of the sad facts of this case."