An article in Reason came out yesterday about the ruling for the Defendants (four drug companies-Teva, Johnson & Johnson, AbbVie, and Endo) in opioid litigation. This is huge for our community. The Judge said the Plaintiffs failed to prove the charges of public nuisance and false advertising. Superior Court Judge, Peter J. Wilson wrote a 42 page ruling. This was the first of thousands of cases filed across the country regarding the “opioid crisis,” filed in 2014. The Plaintiffs’ claims were:
- The companies used false advertising
- They engaged in unlawful business practices
- They created a public nuisance
Judge Wilson ruled the Plaintiffs failed to prove any of these claims. Some direct quotes from Judge Wilson’s ruling:
- “But with no evidence to demonstrate or suggest that the increased prescriptions were not medically appropriate, and with no evidence that even attempts to quantify how medically inappropriate prescriptions caused or contributed to the opioid crisis, Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that the interference by Defendants, or any of them, was unreasonable.”
- “In addition to its relevance to proof of the “unreasonableness” element of a 14 public nuisance claim as discussed above, the absence of evidence concerning medically inappropriate prescriptions also breaks the chain of causation between Defendants’ alleged wrongful conduct and the harms complained of.”
- “The Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to prove an actionable public nuisance for which Defendants, or any of them, are legally liable.”
This next quote is important. Dr. Anna Lembke, a PROP doctor, has been paid as an expert witness in multiple opioid litigation cases. She is a Psychiatrist, who doesn’t know anything about treating pain, but nevertheless has made her career by being an outspoken anti-opioid zealot. It’s about time someone mentions her false testimonies.
- “Dr. (Anna) Lembke testified that one in four patients prescribed opioids would become addicted. As Defendants point out, the studies relied upon by Dr. Lembke for that conclusion are inadequate to support it. The more reliable data would suggest less than 5%, rather than 25%. Under either number, addiction based solely on the patient having been prescribed opioids does not occur in “most of these patients.”
This is a huge win for our community. There are still thousands of opioid litigation cases going on. Let’s hope the judges in those cases will also see the false narrative for what it is. If you’re interested in learning more about Judge Wilson, his biography and contact information are here.