States agree to a $7.4 billion settlement with Purdue Pharma, resolving a significant portion of the opioid litigation against the company. This massive settlement, one of the largest in history, aims to address the devastating consequences of the opioid crisis fueled by Purdue Pharma’s marketing of OxyContin. However, the agreement has sparked significant outrage and controversy, with many feeling that it doesn’t adequately reflect the scale of the harm caused and the culpability of the Sackler family, Purdue Pharma’s owners.
The central point of contention revolves around the Sacklers’ apparent ability to retain substantial wealth despite the catastrophic consequences of their actions.… Continue reading
Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family have agreed to a $7.4 billion settlement to resolve lawsuits stemming from the opioid crisis caused by OxyContin. The Sacklers will pay up to $6.5 billion and relinquish company ownership, while Purdue will contribute nearly $900 million. This revised settlement, exceeding the previous offer by $500 million, requires court approval but avoids anticipated federal opposition. The funds will compensate victims, address the opioid crisis, and provide treatment resources.
Read More
The situation with the Supreme Court rejecting the nationwide opioid settlement with Purdue Pharma is a complex and controversial one. On one hand, the Court made a technically correct ruling based on the interpretation of the Bankruptcy Code. However, the implications of this decision are far-reaching and deeply impactful, especially for the victims of the opioid crisis.
The crux of the matter lies in the fact that the settlement would have shielded the Sackler family from civil lawsuits while providing billions of dollars to combat the opioid epidemic. Sure, the Sacklers agreed to contribute up to $6 billion and give up ownership of the company, but they would have retained billions more.… Continue reading
Matt Underwood 
John Q. Hosedrinker