San Francisco’s opioid case will proceed to trial against Teva, Walgreens
(Reuters) - A federal judge in California said on Tuesday a lawsuit against several drugmakers and pharmacies, including Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd and Walgreens, can proceed, putting the companies on track to face a trial over claims that they fueled the opioid crisis.
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer rejected a bid by Teva, Endo International Plc, AbbVie Inc's Allergan, Walgreens Boots Alliance Inc and Par Pharmaceutical, to delay the lawsuit brought by San Francisco. The city has accused the companies of creating a public nuisance by downplaying the risks of opioid addiction when selling the drugs in California.
The trial is scheduled to begin April 25.
Teva, Allergan, Endo, Par and Walgreens did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The companies have denied San Francisco's allegations.
States and local governments have filed more than 3,300 lawsuits over a drug abuse crisis that the U.S. government says led to nearly 500,000 opioid overdose deaths over two decades.
Teva, Endo and Allergan prevailed last year in a similar lawsuit brought by Orange, Santa Clara and Los Angeles counties and the city of Oakland.
In that case, a state court judge ruled that the California counties failed to prove that the drugmakers' allegedly false or misleading marketing had led to an increase in opioid prescriptions or an increase in addiction.
The defendants in the San Francisco litigation had argued for a delay until an appeal was decided in the Orange County case. An appellate ruling in that case would help clarify if the San Francisco defendants could be held liable under California’s “public nuisance” law, they argued.
Breyer disagreed, noting that the Orange County case was likely to undergo a "lengthy" appeals process. Even if the drugmakers’ victory was upheld on appeal, that would not shut the door on other legal arguments in the San Francisco litigation, the judge said.
For example, Orange County had alleged that the defendants made “false and misleading” statements about the benefits of opioids, while San Francisco accused the drugmakers of failing to monitor the negative impacts of the opioids they sold, Breyer wrote. Those arguments could lead to different results, the judge said.
A delay would also impact opioid lawsuits consolidated in a multidistrict litigation in Ohio federal court, Breyer wrote. San Francisco’s lawsuit was selected as a bellwether case in the MDL and the trial could shed light on arguments raised by other parties in the opioids MDL, Breyer wrote.
The case is City and County of San Francisco v. Purdue Pharma LP, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, No. 3:18-cv-07591.
For San Francisco: Jennie Anderson of Andrus Anderson; Aelish Baig of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd; Elizabeth Cabraser of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein
For Allergan: Donna Marie Welch of Kirkland & Ellis
For Teva: Zachary Hill of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius
For AmerisourceBergen: Steven Boranian of Reed Smith
For Walgreens: Joshua Dick of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher
Read more:
California judge delivers drugmakers 1st trial win in opioid litigation
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.