A federal judge overseeing nearly 2,000 lawsuits brought over the opioid crisis called a potential settlement proposal introduced by plaintiffs attorneys a “novel idea,” but held off ruling on the motion to allow time for objections.

U.S. District Judge Dan Polster of the Northern District of Ohio had planned to hear arguments on Tuesday about a motion for certification of a “negotiation class” that lead plaintiffs lawyers in the multidistrict litigation had filed earlier this month. But, on Monday, several opioid distributors and pharmacies named as defendants in the cases filed court documents opposing the idea. Attorneys general from 30 states, the U.S. territory of Guam and Washington, D.C., whose cases aren’t part of the multidistrict litigation, also filed letters Monday urging Polster to reject what they called a “novel and untested approach” to settlement.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]