IN RE: NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION OPIATE LITIGATION - Articles

All Content

IN RE: NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION OPIATE LITIGATION

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Sep 24, 2020

Head Comment: MOORE delivered a separate dissenting opinion

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Sonya D. Winner, COVINGTON & BURLING LLP, San Francisco, California, for Appellants in 19-4097. Kevin K. Russell, GOLDSTEIN & RUSSELL, P.C., Bethesda, Maryland, for Appellants in 19-4099. Samuel Issacharoff, New York, New York, for Appellees.

Attorneys 2: ON BRIEF: Sonya D. Winner, COVINGTON & BURLING LLP, San Francisco, California, Beth S. Brinkman, Mark H. Lynch, COVINGTON & BURLING LLP, Washington, D.C., Ashley W. Hardin, WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP, Washington, D.C., Kim M. Watterson, REED SMITH LLP, Los Angeles, California, Tina M. Tabacchi, Tara A. Fumerton, JONES DAY, Chicago, Illinois, Benjamin C. Mizer, JONES DAY, Washington, D.C., Kaspar J. Stoffelmayr, BARTLIT BECK LLP, Chicago, Illinois, Kelly A. Moore, MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP, New York, New York, Elisa P. McEnroe, MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Timothy D. Johnson, CAVITCH, FAMILO & DURKIN CO., LPA, Cleveland, Ohio, Alexandra W. Miller, ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP, Washington, D.C., John J. Haggerty, FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP, Warrington, Pennsylvania, for Appellants in 19-4097.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Kevin K. Russell, Thomas C. Goldstein, Eric F. Citron, GOLDSTEIN & RUSSELL, P.C., Bethesda, Maryland, for Appellants in 19-4099.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Samuel Issacharoff, New York, New York, Christopher A. Seeger, Diogenes P. Kekatos, Jennifer R. Scullion, SEEGER WEISS LLP, Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, Robert Klonoff, Portland, Oregon, for Appellees.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Mary Massaron, PLUNKETT COONEY, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, Oramel H. (O.H.) Skinner, OFFICE OF THE ARIZONA ATTORNEY GENERAL, Phoenix, Arizona, Mikal C. Watts, Shelly A. Sanford, Meredith Drukker Stratigopoulos, WATTS GUERRA LLP, Austin, Texas, Dennis C. Reich, Shreedhar R. Patel, REICH & BINSTOCK, LLP, Houston, Texas, Jeff Reeves, Cheryl Priest Ainsworth, Kevin N. Royer, THEODORA ORINGHER PC, Costa Mesa, California, Marc J. Bern, MARC J. BERN & PARTNERS LLP, New York, New York, Robert T. Eglet, Robert M. Adams, Erica D. Entsminger, EGLET ADAMS, Las Vegas, Nevada, Jennifer Scifo, KRALOVEC, JAMBOIS & SCHWARTZ, Chicago, Illinois, John B. White, Jr., Marghretta H. Shisko, HARRISON WHITE, P.C., Spartanburg, South Carolina, Andrew J. Pincus, MAYER BROWN LLP, Washington, D.C., for Amici Curiae.

Judge(s): MOORE, CLAY, and McKEAGUE, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland

CLAY, Circuit Judge. The latest appeal in this multi-district litigation (“MDL”) relating to the opioid crisis centers on the district court’s order certifying a “negotiation class” under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. The court has certified a class of all cities and counties throughout the United States for purposes of negotiating a settlement between class members and opioid manufacturers, distributors, and pharmacies. Appellants, objecting opioid distributors and retail pharmacies (“Defendants”), as well as six objecting Ohio cities, appeal the district court’s order certifying this negotiation class. Appellees, putative representatives of the negotiation class (“Plaintiffs”), request us to approve this novel form of class action. For the reasons provided below, we decline to do so, and therefore REVERSE the district court’s order.

Attachments: