US Supreme Court set to review Purdue Pharma bankruptcy settlement
Send a link to a friend
[December 04, 2023]
By John Kruzel and Andrew Chung
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday is set to hear a
challenge by President Joe Biden's administration to the legality of
OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma's bankruptcy settlement, a deal that if
approved would shield its wealthy Sackler family owners from lawsuits
over their role in the country's opioid epidemic.
Purdue's owners under the settlement would receive immunity in exchange
for paying up to $6 billion to settle thousands of lawsuits filed by
states, hospitals, people who had become addicted and others who have
sued the Stamford, Connecticut-based company over its misleading
marketing of the powerful pain medication OxyContin.
The justices in August paused bankruptcy proceedings concerning Purdue
and its affiliates when they agreed to take up the administration's
appeal of a ruling by the Manhattan-based 2nd U.S. Circuit of Appeals
upholding the settlement.
The Biden administration in court papers told the justices that allowing
the 2nd Circuit's decision to stand would provide "a roadmap for
corporations and wealthy individuals to misuse the bankruptcy system to
avoid mass-tort liability."
At issue is whether U.S. bankruptcy law allows Purdue's restructuring to
include legal protections for the members of the Sackler family, who
have not filed for personal bankruptcy.
Purdue filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2019 to address its debts,
nearly all of which stemmed from thousands of lawsuits alleging that
OxyContin helped kickstart an opioid epidemic that has caused more than
half a million U.S. overdose deaths over two decades.
Purdue estimates that its bankruptcy settlement, approved by a U.S.
bankruptcy judge in 2021, would provide $10 billion in value to its
creditors, including state and local governments, individual victims of
addiction, hospitals and others who have sued the company.
The Biden administration and eight states challenged the settlement. All
of the states dropped their opposition after the Sacklers agreed to
contribute more to the settlement fund.
[to top of second column]
|
Bottles of prescription painkiller OxyContin, 40mg, 20mg and 15mg
pills, made by Purdue Pharma L.D. sit on a counter at a local
pharmacy, in Provo, Utah, U.S., April 25, 2017. REUTERS/George
Frey/File Photo
In upholding the settlement in May,
the 2nd Circuit concluded that federal bankruptcy law allows legal
protections for non-bankrupt parties like the Sacklers in
extraordinary circumstances. It ruled that the legal claims against
Purdue were inextricably linked to claims against its owners, and
that allowing lawsuits to continue targeting the Sacklers would
undermine Purdue's efforts to reach a bankruptcy settlement.
Members of the Sackler family have denied wrongdoing but expressed
regret that OxyContin "unexpectedly became part of an opioid
crisis." They said in May that the bankruptcy settlement would
provide "substantial resources for people and communities in need."
The administration told the Supreme Court that Purdue's settlement
is an abuse of bankruptcy protections meant for debtors in
"financial distress," not people like the Sacklers. The
administration has also alleged that the Sackler family members
withdrew $11 billion from Purdue before agreeing to contribute $6
billion to its opioid settlement.
Many other stakeholders have responded in opposition to the
administration's request to halt the settlement. A group comprising
more than 60,000 people who have filed personal injury claims
stemming from their exposure to Purdue opioid products told the
Supreme Court they support the settlement, including legal immunity
for members of the Sackler family.
"Regardless of how one feels about the role of the Sackler family in
the creation and escalation of the opioid crisis," the group told
the justices, "the fact remains that the billions of dollars in
abatement and victim compensation funds hinge on confirmation and
consummation of the existing plan."
(Reporting by John Kruzel and Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)
[© 2023 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |