Posted on 12/16/2021 7:57:23 PM PST by ameribbean expat
A federal judge in Manhattan overturned a roughly $4.5 billion settlement between OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma LP and members of the Sackler family who own the drugmaker, a surprising decision that raises questions about the future of the company and its owners, who have been accused of fueling the nation’s opioid crisis.
Judge Colleen McMahon of the Southern District of New York ruled late Thursday that legal releases that would shield members of the Sackler family from civil opioid lawsuits are not permitted under the bankruptcy.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
Good!
No it’s not good.
If they did something criminal, then charge them.
Making this change for one defendant makes it for everybody.
Bad cases make bad law. Giving the government this type of power sets bad bad precident
So basically this asserts that corporations don’t legally shield the actual humans behind it. A nuclear bomb in corporate tort law if it stands.
It’s a move away from personal responsibility. Just like suing gun manufacturers for crime involving guns.
I hope the legal process destroys this family!
The Sacklers have billions and will fight.
They can afford to buy TV time on a presidential campaign scale.
This was a bankruptcy case and the judge’s ruling was based on distributions made to the Sackler family immediately prior to the Chapter 11 filing.
“The states’ appeals appeared to gain traction last month when Judge McMahon questioned if the more than $10 billion Purdue distributed to the Sacklers before the company filed chapter 11 represents a larger abuse of the bankruptcy system.
She asked if family members took so much from the company that it had to accept their $4.5 billion settlement offer, in exchange for a broad grant of legal protection from lawsuits.
Judge McMahon said Thursday that about half of the distributions were either invested in offshore companies owned by members of the Sackler family or deposited in trusts “that could not be reached in bankruptcy.”
“When the family fortune was secure, the Sackler family members withdrew from Purdue’s board and management,” Judge McMahon said. “Bankruptcy discussions commenced the following year.”
Seems to me a lot of entities are getting away with a lot of misdeeds, while the government focuses on one manufacturer. What about hospitals and doctors who prescribed this stuff like candy?
It’s not a corporation, it’s a limited partnership. Partnerships have liability risk to the owners that corporations do not.
So in short:
*Facing giant lawsuits Purdue declared bankruptcy
*Before doing so they transferred almost all remaining assets to the Sacklers (about $10 billion)
*Sacklers then settled on giving back $4.5 billion
If this was allowed, wouldn’t any company facing a major lawsuit simply transfer everything to their owners and leave the afflicted with nothing?
HULU has an interesting 8-episode docudrama about the Sackler family/Purdue Pharma and the opioid crisis.
Of course, it has a obligatory lesbian story line, but beyond that it is revealing about the opioid crisis, the Sacklers, etc.
HULU: https://press.hulu.com/shows/dopesick/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.