Ohio Supreme Court shields pharmacies from opioid lawsuit penalties
- The Ohio Supreme Court ruled that counties cannot file public nuisance claims against national pharmacies due to the state's product liability law.
- Lake and Trumbull counties had previously won a $650 million judgment for the pharmacies' role in the opioid crisis.
- This decision could hinder local efforts to hold corporations accountable for their misconduct related to public health issues.
In a significant ruling by the Ohio Supreme Court, the justices decided that Ohio's product liability law precludes counties from pursuing public nuisance claims against major pharmacies such as CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart. The lawsuit originated from Lake and Trumbull counties near Cleveland, which had previously secured a $650 million judgment against these chains in 2022 for their role in the opioid crisis. The court's interpretation clarified that the Ohio Product Liability Act was designed to eliminate common law product liability cases, reinforcing protections for pharmacies against these types of claims. This decision is viewed as highly detrimental by county attorneys and advocates in the ongoing opioid litigation. They argue that public nuisance claims have been instrumental in achieving significant settlements nationally, totaling nearly $60 billion, with Ohio receiving approximately $1 billion in total. The ruling indicates a shift in legal recourse available to communities facing health crises related to corporate misconduct, leaving them in a challenging position despite their previous legal victories in this area. Attorney Peter Weinberger, representing the counties, expressed concern that the ruling undermines communities' abilities to confront corporate wrongdoing and stated that they would seek alternative legal avenues to continue their fight against the opioid epidemic. This ongoing litigation is particularly noteworthy given the gravity of the opioid death toll in the United States, which has surpassed half a million since 1999. The case has drawn considerable attention due to its implications for future lawsuits involving pharmaceutical companies and the legal strategies that communities may adopt moving forward.