Page 9 - Dallas Vol 5 No 2

KAY VAN WEY | Medical Malpractice Trends in Opioid Litigation
By now you have heard the news that the U.S. is fac- ing an opioid drug crisis. Recently the opioid epi- demic has gathered a lot of media attention and in-
creased political discussion, but the problem has actually existed for decades.
My rst experiences with opioid litigation began many years ago with a few dozen lawsuits against a local “pill mill” clinic and a liated pharmacy. ese cases revealed that people were coming from miles away, lining up, and even sleeping on the hoods of their cars, all to wait for the clinic to open. I heard stories of notebooks being passed around to create lists for tracking a “ rst come rst serve” order, and of st ghts breaking out over this list. A er one was “seen” by the clinic and received a written pre- scription, just a short walk away the pharmacy had orders pre- lled and ready— just waiting for a name to slap on the bottle. You see, the pharmacy already knew which pre- scriptions would be written well before the “patients” were “treated” by the clinic. And so, begun opioid litigation.
My personal conviction has always been that while many are at fault in opioid cases, the true root of the prob- lem runs much deeper than just individual physicians and pharmacists, the root being Big Pharma. It is the large pharmaceutical companies pushing these drugs onto the market should really be held accountable for the immense damage. Now, a big hooray is in order because it is nally happening!
Opioid litigation is experiencing a revolutionary shi . Instead of just the traditional, individual suits with a single patient suing the providing doctor or pharmacist— opioid-related claims are being led directly against Big Pharma by much larger plainti s, including cities, states, counties, hospitals, and even Native American tribes.
Most of the claims allege improper marketing and dis- tribution of prescription opioid medications. e litigant entities are seeking to recoup some of the billions of dol- lars spent on the opioid crisis. For example, New York City has led a suit against nine large manufacturers and dis- tributors, alleging negligence, public nuisance by mislead- ing consumers about the drugs’ risks, and fueling abuse through oversupplying.
Similar suits have been lodged across the country: three Ohio counties led claims alleging failure to properly regulate deliveries and report suspicious orders of opioid drugs; Multnomah County in Oregon is seeking dam- ages of $250 million to recoup the costs of opioid-related overdoses, treatment, and medical training, costs which currently are borne by taxpayers; the Cherokee Nation
led suit against Walgreens,
CVS Health, and Wal-Mart for
“ ooding” their communities
with prescription painkillers
and pro ting o the resulting abuse. e list goes on.
As of February 2018, more than 180 lawsuits were led by counties, cities, states, and other large parties against opioid drug manufacturers and distributors. e large number of very similar cases led plainti s to petition the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation for consoli- dation of the cases into one Multidistrict Litigation case.
Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) describes the consoli- dation of many cases from various federal district courts into one federal district court, so as to combine discovery and pre-trial proceedings for convenience and judicial ef- ciency. An MDL combines the numerous similar cases under a few, representative ‘bellwether’ trials to be heard by the single federal judge. Unlike class-actions however, in an MDL, plainti ’s cases remain separate.
On December 5, 2017, the “National Prescription Opi- ate Litigation MDL No. 2804,” consolidated 155 opioid suits to the Northern District of Ohio, under US District Judge Daniel Polster. While the MDL move essentially puts the entire opiate pharmaceutical industry on trial, it is not yet clear whether individual patient claims will continue or if opioid-related litigation will be condensed within the MDL. ough this question remains to be answered, it is nonetheless groundbreaking that action is nally being taken against the top of the opioid supply chain.
It is clear that many are to blame for the opioid epidemic but laying it at the feet of Big Pharma is critical in terms of allocating liability, providing relief to the numerous vic- tims of this crisis, and ultimately to stopping this prob- lem in its tracks. Going directly to the source, the huge pharmaceutical companies, and forcing them to take re- sponsibility is a huge rst step to ending the vicious cycle of over-marketing, over-prescribing, and overdosing of opioid drugs.
KAY VAN WEY IS A PLAINTIFF’S MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ATTORNEY. AFTER MORE THAN 30 YEARS IN THE TRENCHES, HER GOAL IS TO MAKE HERSELF EX- TINCT BY HELPING TO ERADICATE PREVENTABLE MEDICAL ERRORS. VOTED TEXAS SUPER LAWYER FOR 14 CONSECUTIVE YEARS, SHE’S NAMED TO D BEST MAGAZINE IN TORT PRODUCT & MEDICAL LIABILITY LITIGATION: PLAINTIFF 2016. KAY HAS ALSO ATTAINED MEMBERSHIP IN THE MILLION AND MULTI- MILLION DOLLAR ADVOCATES FORUM. HER VAST EXPERIENCE IN PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION, COMBINED WITH HER TREMENDOUS WORK ETHIC AND LEADERSHIP SKILLS, HAVE CULMINATED IN HER LEADING AN “A” TEAM OF COMMITTED PROFESSIONALS. CONTACT KAY ONLINE AT VANWEYLAW.COM OR [email protected].
AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com
9