Judge says he’ll OK opioid settlement with Purdue Pharma, Sackler family : NPR

NEW YORK — A federal bankruptcy court judge said Friday he will approve OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma's latest deal to settle thousands of lawsuits over opioid losses, including some money for thousands of victims of the epidemic.

The deal, overseen by U.S. bankruptcy judge Sean Lane, will require members of the Sackler family, who own the company, to contribute up to $7 billion over 15 years. The new agreement replaces one that the U.S. Supreme Court rejected last year, finding it would have inadequately protected family members from future lawsuits. The judge said he would explain his decision at a hearing on Tuesday.

It is one of the largest in a series of opioid lawsuits brought by state and local authorities against drug manufacturers, wholesalers and pharmacies. That could close a long chapter — perhaps the entire book — of the legal odyssey of efforts to hold the company accountable for its role in the opioid crisis linked to 900,000 deaths in the U.S. since 1999, including from heroin and illicit fentanyl.

The lawyers and judges involved called it one of the most complex bankruptcies in US history. Ultimately, attorneys representing Purdue, cities, states, counties, Indian tribes, people suffering from drug addiction and others were nearly unanimous in persuading a judge to approve the bankruptcy plan for Purdue, which filed for protection six years ago as it faced lawsuits whose claims have grown to trillions of dollars.

Purdue attorney Marshall Huebner told the judge he would like to “raise $40 trillion or $100 trillion to compensate those who have suffered an unfathomable loss.” But without that option, he said, “The plan is entirely legal, delivering the greatest good for the greatest number of people in the shortest possible time.”

This time the opposition is much calmer

The saga has been emotional and contentious among the many groups that have sued Purdue, often exposing a possible disconnect between the pursuit of justice and the practical role of the bankruptcy court.

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected the previous deal because it said it was inappropriate for members of the Sackler family to receive immunity from opioid lawsuits. Under the new agreement, organizations that do not agree to the settlement can sue them. The family members collectively own billions, but most of their assets are held in trusts in offshore accounts that would be difficult to access through lawsuits.

This time there was even greater consensus among the government groups involved, and resistance from individuals was largely muted. Of the more than 54,000 personal injury victims who voted to approve the plan. only 218 said no. More people in this group did not vote.

Unlike other proceedings, there were no protests outside the courthouse.

Several opponents spoke during the three-day hearing, sometimes heckling the judge. Some said only victims should receive settlement funds, not states and other government agencies. Others wanted a judge to find members of the Sackler family criminally liable — something Lane said was beyond the scope of bankruptcy court, but the settlement does not prevent prosecutors from continuing to investigate.

A Florida woman whose husband struggled with addiction after being prescribed OxyContin following an accident told a court the deal wasn't enough.

“The natural laws of karma dictate that the Sacklers and Purdue Pharma must pay for what they did,” Pamela Bartz Halaszak said in a video.

The deal would be one of the largest opioid settlements ever.

The spate of lawsuits filed by government agencies against Purdue and other drug makers, drug wholesalers and pharmacy chains began about a decade ago.

Most of the largest have already committed about $50 billion in total, with much of the money going to combat the opioid crisis. There is no mechanism for tracking where it all goes, or comprehensive requirements for assessing the effectiveness of spending. Those who suffered the most usually did not have the right to vote.

In addition to contributing cash, members of the Sackler family will officially relinquish ownership of the company. No one has served on the board of directors or received payments since 2018. Unlike a similar hearing four years ago, no one was called to testify at this week's hearing.

The company will change its name to Knoa Pharma and gain new executives who will use future profits to fight the opioid crisis. This could happen in the spring of 2026.

Family members will be prohibited from participating in companies that sell opioids anywhere in the world. And their names will not be added to institutions in exchange for charitable donations. The name has already been removed from museums and universities.

Company documents, including many that are typically subject to attorney-client privilege, must be made public.

Some people harmed by Purdue opioids will get some money

Unlike other large opioid settlements, those harmed by Purdue products will be in line to receive some money as part of the settlement. About $850 million will be allocated for them, of which more than $100 million will be allocated to help children born with opioid withdrawal syndrome.

All money for individual victims will be delivered next year.

About 139 thousand people have active claims for money. However, many of them did not provide evidence that they were prescribed Purdue opioids and would not receive anything. Assuming about half of individual applicants will qualify, lawyers expect those who had prescriptions for at least six months to receive about $16,000 each, and those who had them for a shorter period will receive about $8,000 before legal fees, which will reduce what people actually receive.

One woman, whose family member suffered from opioid addiction, told the court via video Thursday that the agreement does not help people with substance use disorders.

“Tell me guys how can you sleep at night knowing that people will get so little money that they won't be able to do anything with it,” asked Lauryn Ferrante of Staten Island, New York.

Christopher Shore, an attorney representing a group of individual victims, said in court Friday that the settlement is a better deal than going to trial with members of the Sackler family. “Some Sacklers are bad people,” he said, “but the reality is that sometimes bad people win lawsuits.”

Most of the money will go to state and local governments to be used in their efforts to mitigate the damage from the opioid epidemic. The number of overdose deaths has dropped over the past few years, and experts believe the decline is partly due to the impact of settlement dollars.