Texans for Lawsuit Reform

Through political action, legal, academic and market research, and grassroots initiatives, TLR fights for common-sense reforms that keep Texas open for business.

  • About TLR
    • Our Mission
    • Our Team
    • Timeline of Reforms
  • Videos
  • Issues
  • Resource Center
    • Special Reports
    • In the News
    • Press Releases
    • The Advocate
    • TLR Blog: For the Record
  • Get Involved
  • Contact
    • Contact Us
    • Invite a TLR Speaker
  • Donate
  • Stay Informed
In the News

Oklahoma Supreme Court Throws Out $465 Million Opioid Ruling Against J.&J.

New York Times, November 9, 2021

The 5-1 decision is a setback for those who are fighting to hold big drug makers accountable for the opioid epidemic.

Oklahoma’s highest court on Tuesday threw out a 2019 ruling that required Johnson & Johnson to pay the state $465 million for its role in the opioid epidemic. It was the second time this month that a court has invalidated a key legal strategy used by plaintiffs in thousands of cases attempting to hold the pharmaceutical industry responsible for the crisis.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court, 5-1, rejected the state’s argument that the company violated “public nuisance” laws by aggressively overstating the benefits of its prescription opioid painkillers and downplaying the dangers.

The ruling, along with a similar opinion by a California state judge on Nov. 1, could be a harbinger that plaintiffs’ hopes for favorable resolution in courts nationwide against opioid manufacturers, distributors and retailers might be premature. The decision could also embolden the companies to dig in.

But because most public nuisance laws are state-specific, it is unclear how much impact the Oklahoma decision could ultimately have on cases elsewhere. The Oklahoma judges’ decision underscored their reading of their state’s law.

“Oklahoma public nuisance law does not extend to the manufacturing, marketing and selling of prescription opioids,” the judges wrote in Tuesday’s majority opinion.

According to federal data, abuse of opioids has contributed to the deaths of some 500,000 people in the United States since the late 1990s, and the toll has worsened during the Covid pandemic.

In a statement, Johnson & Johnson, referring to Janssen, its pharmaceutical division, said it had “deep sympathy” for everyone affected by the opioids epidemic. But the company added: “The clear and unassailable decision by the Oklahoma State Supreme Court reflects the facts of this case: Janssen’s actions relating to the marketing and promotion of these important prescription pain medications were appropriate and responsible and did not cause a public nuisance.”

In their opinion, the judges gave weight to the company’s response that it had not promoted its products in recent years and had sold off one of its product lines in 2015. The judges decided that manufacturers could not be held “perpetually liable” for their products.

The Oklahoma attorney general’s office, the first in the United States to bring an opioid lawsuit to trial, had contended that health is a public right that Johnson & Johnson violated under the state’s public nuisance law. Other opioid manufacturers targeted in the state’s lawsuit, including Teva and Purdue Pharma, settled their cases before this bench trial against Johnson & Johnson began in May 2019. This decision does not affect those agreements.

John O’Connor, the Oklahoma attorney general, expressed disappointment with the decision, but said: “We are still pursuing our other pending claims against opioid distributors who have flooded our communities with these highly addictive drugs for decades. Oklahomans deserve nothing less.”

In the new ruling, the judges said that Oklahoma’s 1910 public nuisance law typically referred to an abrogation of a public right like access to roads or clean water or air. The judges found fault with the state’s case, saying it failed to identify a public right under the nuisance law and had instead attempted to apply a “novel theory” to what was more likely a products liability case.

The harm alleged by the state, the judges said, stemmed from the company’s legal product — prescription opioids approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Individuals suffered, the court decided, rather than the public at large.

Other case flaws cited by the judges echoed critiques made earlier this month by a California state trial judge who also found in favor of Johnson & Johnson. The company, the Oklahoma judges said, had no control over the distribution and use of its product once the drug left its purview — an argument used successfully by gun manufacturers to turn aside public nuisance litigation.

“Regulation of prescription opioids belongs to federal and state legislatures and their agencies,” the Oklahoma judges wrote. They were alluding to the F.D.A., as well as to the Drug Enforcement Administration, which is supposed to monitor pill diversion, and to the state’s own prescription monitoring program.

Elizabeth Burch, a law professor at the University of Georgia, cautioned that these two decisions should not be interpreted too broadly to predict the fate of other cases wending their way through courts, because other states have their own public nuisance laws.

She noted that the Oklahoma ruling went even further than the California decision, because it stated that public nuisance law couldn’t be used against any entity in the drug supply chain, including distributors and pharmacies.

But she said the ruling could potentially influence plaintiffs’ response to Johnson & Johnson’s major national settlement offer in July, when it proposed to pay $5 billion over nine years to resolve all opioid litigation against it.

The company’s offer has to be accepted by a majority of the thousands of local governments that have sued.

“If I was a plaintiff that was on the fence about whether to enter the J.&J. settlement, this ruling might push me closer to settling, if I was risk averse,” Ms. Burch said.

Follow us on Facebook

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

22 hours ago

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

In case you missed it - 15 Harris County judges resolved fewer felony cases during the pandemic, and all 23 courts have more pending cases now than when the COVID epidemic began. As of March, there were over 48,000 pending active cases in Criminal District Court. Read and share: bit.ly/3yeuPc7 ... See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

'Do your job,' victim tells judge in Harris County's slowest court

bit.ly

Fifteen judges resolved fewer felony cases during the pandemic and all 23 courts have more pending cases now than when the pandemic began. Harris County Judge Ramona Franklin, of the 338th Criminal Di...
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 0
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

2 days ago

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

The Dallas County DA argued a judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned after she lowered a defendant’s bail considerably while his defense lawyer is one of her top campaign contributors, and then raised his bail after media reports about her rulings. Read and share: bit.ly/3lfQMzM ... See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

Dallas judge under scrutiny for bail rulings recuses herself from cases

bit.ly

Judge Chika Anyiam, of Criminal District Court 7, recused herself Monday from 10 felony cases against Julio Guerrero. A Dallas County judge who faced public scrutiny for lowering a murder suspect’s ...
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 2
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

3 days ago

Texans for Lawsuit Reform

TLR General Counsel Lee Parsley joined the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform podcast to discuss nuclear verdicts in the trucking industry and what legislators can do to ensure that excessive lawsuits don't shut down this vital industry. Listen and share: bit.ly/3wjgKJ9 ... See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

Nuclear Verdicts Create Litigation "Vortex" for Trucking Industry

bit.ly

In this episode of Cause for Action, Nathan Morris, senior vice president, legal reform advocacy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform, is joined by Lee Parsley, the general couns...
View on Facebook
·Share

Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Linked InShare by Email

  • Likes: 0
  • Shares: 1
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter

lawsuitreform avatarTLR@lawsuitreform·
16h 1527408930703523840

Since TLR’s founding, our supporters have made their voices heard at the Capitol by phone, e-mail, & personal visits on every issue that affects a healthy civil justice system. Make your voice heard & get involved with TLR today!

Get Involved

Texans for Lawsuit Reform has thousands of supporters from across Texas who are committed to a fair and balanced civil justice system.

bit.ly

Reply on Twitter 1527408930703523840Retweet on Twitter 1527408930703523840Like on Twitter 15274089307035238401Twitter 1527408930703523840
lawsuitreform avatarTLR@lawsuitreform·
22h 1527318698804908040

#ICYMI: 15 Harris County judges resolved fewer felony cases during the pandemic & all 23 courts have more pending cases now than when the COVID epidemic began. As of March, there were over 48,000 pending active cases in Criminal District Court. Read & RT:

'Do your job,' victim tells judge in Harris County's slowest court

Fifteen judges resolved fewer felony cases during the pandemic and all 23 courts have more pending cases now than when the pandemic began. Harris Coun...

bit.ly

Reply on Twitter 1527318698804908040Retweet on Twitter 15273186988049080402Like on Twitter 15273186988049080401Twitter 1527318698804908040
lawsuitreform avatarTLR@lawsuitreform·
18 May 1527046564635721728

Want to make a difference in the fight against lawsuit abuse? Join the TLR team today! #stoplawsuitabuse

Get Involved

Texans for Lawsuit Reform has thousands of supporters from across Texas who are committed to a fair and balanced civil justice system.

bit.ly

Reply on Twitter 1527046564635721728Retweet on Twitter 1527046564635721728Like on Twitter 1527046564635721728Twitter 1527046564635721728

Texans for Lawsuit Reform
1701 Brun Street
Houston, Texas 77019

Ph. 713-963-9363
  • About TLR
  • Our Mission
  • Our Team
  • Timeline of Reforms
  • Videos
  • Issues
  • Resource Center
  • For the Record
  • Special Reports
  • In the News
  • Press Releases
  • Invite a TLR Speaker
  • Get Involved
  • Invite a TLR Speaker
  • Donate
  • Stay Informed
  • Contact TLR

Copyright © 2022 · Texans for Lawsuit Reform. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2022 · Texans for Lawsuit Reform.
All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy