Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 07-04-2022
Case Style:
Caball County and The City of Huntington v. AmerisourceBergen Drug Co., Cardinal Health Inc. and McKesson Corp.
Case Number: 3:17-cv-01665
Judge: David Faber
Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Plaintiff's Attorney: Cabell County District Attorney's Office, et al.
Defendant's Attorney:
Click Here to Watch How To Find A Lawyer by Kent Morlan
Click Here For The Best Charleston Civil Litigation Lawyer Directory
Description: Charleston, West Virginia governmental plaintiffs sued Defendants claiming that they created a public nuisance and were responsible for the injuries and/or damages caused by the distribution of 81 million opioid pills in West Virginia over an eight year period.
The Plaintiffs argued that the distributors should be held responsible for sending a "tsunami" of prescription pain pills into the community and that the defendants' conduct was unreasonable, reckless and disregarded the public's health and safety in an area ravaged by opioid addiction.
The Defendants blamed an increase in prescriptions written by doctors along with poor communication and pill quotas set by federal agents.
Outcome: In view of the court's findings and conclusions, the court finds that judgment should be entered in defendants' favor.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
Description: Charleston, West Virginia governmental plaintiffs sued Defendants claiming that they created a public nuisance and were responsible for the injuries and/or damages caused by the distribution of 81 million opioid pills in West Virginia over an eight year period.
The Plaintiffs argued that the distributors should be held responsible for sending a "tsunami" of prescription pain pills into the community and that the defendants' conduct was unreasonable, reckless and disregarded the public's health and safety in an area ravaged by opioid addiction.
The Defendants blamed an increase in prescriptions written by doctors along with poor communication and pill quotas set by federal agents.
Outcome: In view of the court's findings and conclusions, the court finds that judgment should be entered in defendants' favor.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: