Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Purdue Pharma L.P.

Superior Court of Rhode Island, Providence

November 15, 2018

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND, by and through, PETER F. KILMARTIN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, Plaintiff,
v.
PURDUE PHARMA L.P.; PURDUE PHARMA INC.; THE PURDUE FREDERICK COMPANY, INC.; INSYS THERAPEUTICS, INC.; CARDINAL HEALTH, INC., MCKESSON CORPORATION d/b/a MCKESSON DRUG COMPANY; and AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORPORATION, Defendants.

          For Plaintiff: Peter F. Kilmartin, Esq.; Robert J. McConnell, Esq.; Donald A. Migliori, Esq.

          Plaintiff: Peter F. Kilmartin, Esq. Robert J. McConnell, Esq. Donald A. Migliori, Esq.

          Defendants: Purdue Pharma L.P. Matthew T. Oliverio, Esq.

          Insys Therapeutics, Inc. John Tarantino, Esq. Leslie D. Parker, Esq. Patricia K. Rocha, Esq.

          Cardinal Health, Inc. Robert Corrente, Esq. Christopher N. Dawson, Esq.

          McKesson Corporation d/b/a McKesson Drug Company Joseph V. Cavanagh, Jr., Esq. Mary C. Dunn, Esq.

          Amerisourcebergen Drug Corporation Gerald J. Petros, Esq. Mitchell Edwards, Esq.

          DECISION

          GIBNEY, P.J.

         Before this Court is Plaintiff State of Rhode Island's (State) Rule 7 Motion to Compel Defendants' Response to the State's First Request for Production of Documents (Motion to Compel) from defendants Purdue Pharma L.P.; Purdue Pharma Inc.; the Purdue Frederick Company, Inc.; Insys Therapeutics, Inc.; Cardinal Health, Inc.; McKesson Corporation d/b/a/ McKesson Drug Company; and AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation (collectively Defendants). Defendants object and jointly move to stay discovery (Motion to Stay) until this Court rules on Defendants' September 28, 2018 Motion to Dismiss. This Court exercises jurisdiction pursuant to G.L. 1956 § 8-2-14.

         I

         Facts and Travel

         On June 25, 2018, the State of Rhode Island, by and through its Attorney General, filed a complaint (the Complaint) against the Defendants, manufacturers and distributors of prescription opioid pharmaceutical products.[1] In the Complaint, the State cited the current record numbers of addictions, overdoses, and deaths caused by the use and abuse of opioids (the Opioid Epidemic). The Complaint included counts of public nuisance, violations of the Rhode Island False Claims Act, fraud and fraudulent misrepresentation, negligence, and unjust enrichment. The State alleged that Defendants engaged in deceptive, misleading, and illegal marketing and distribution practices in the State of Rhode Island, and further maintained that these practices contributed to the Opioid Epidemic.

         On June 25, 2018, the State served Defendants with the State's First Request for Production of Documents (First Request). The First Request sought, inter alia, all documents and communications regarding the marketing of opioids (including general marketing plans and those targeted at Rhode Island), all documents related to the distribution of opioids in Rhode Island, documents and communications concerning monetary or non-monetary payments from Defendants to Rhode Island prescribers of opioids, and information regarding any suspicious orders or declined opioid prescriptions from Rhode Island pharmacies. Defendants failed to produce any documents in response to the State's First Request. In a status conference on August 21, 2018, the State stated its need for the requested information. Defendants expressed their intent to file a motion to dismiss (Motion to Dismiss) by September 28, 2018, as well as a motion to stay discovery until the Court ruled on the Motion to Dismiss. The Court entered an Order of Assignment and Stipulation that the parties meet and confer regarding the State's First Request, and the State agreed to an extension of Defendants' deadline to respond to the First Request to September 7, 2018.

         The State filed this Motion to Compel pursuant to Super. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(3). Defendants responded with a joint Motion to Stay and a joint objection to the State's Motion to Compel. The State objects to Defendants' Motion to Stay. On September 28, the Defendants filed their Motion to Dismiss, asserting that the State failed ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.