by Eric Sagonowsky | Nov 18, 2019 10:40am
After losing
the nation’s first major opioid trial in Oklahoma this
summer, Johnson & Johnson lawyers sought to reduce the
company's liability. Now, a judge has chopped more than $100 million off
the verdict.
Judge
Thad Balkman slashed the verdict to $465 million—from $572
million—based on a miscalculation he made in determining the original
verdict, The Wall Street Journal reports. After the first decision, state
officials sought to secure more payments, but Judge Balkman rejected
that effort.
The $465 million figure
covers opioid epidemic abatement costs for one year. Previously, state
officials attempted squeezing 20 years of payments or more.
The verdict is “neither
supported by the facts nor the law,” a J&J representative said, as
quoted by the WSJ. The company plans to appeal.
The case in Oklahoma is
separate from the national opioid litigation centered in Cleveland federal
court. Oklahoma prosecutors originally sued J&J, Teva and Purdue Pharma,
but the latter two companies settled ahead of trial for a combined $355
million. In the federal litigation, thousands of cities, counties and
other groups have sued opioid makers and distributors. Dozens of state
attorneys general have sued over the crisis as well.
Last week, settlement
discussions in the larger litigation continued in Washington, D.C., according
to WSJ. J&J has offered $4 billion to settle the cases it faces, while
distributors offered $18 billion and Teva offered billions in free drugs.
In a new twist, nine
large cities and counties wrote last week that they’re unsatisfied with the
current proposal, according to WSJ. It's “too little, too late” and
doesn’t adequately address the crisis, they said.
No comments:
Post a Comment