Judge Rules Exec Can Cite Alleged Weil Conflicts To Seek New Opioids Trial
The former national sales director for Insys claims that Weil's concurrent representation of him and his employer posed a conflict that requires a new trial.
August 07, 2019 at 02:21 PM
3 minute read
The former national sales director of opioid medicine manufacturer Insys Therapeutics, seeking a new trial, has accused his ex-defense lawyers at Weil, Gotshal & Manges of hiding a conflict from him because their firm is also working on Insys’ bankruptcy.
Richard Simon was one of five Insys executives convicted in Boston federal court of racketeering over the company’s payments to doctors, allegedly in exchange for prescribing its super-potent painkiller Subsys to patients who didn’t merit it. He and his co-defendants sought a new trial earlier this year, claiming the evidence against them was weak and misunderstood by jurors.
On Monday, however, Simon went further, saying it had become apparent that his lawyers at Weil had a conflict they didn’t tell him about. While supposedly defending him, Simon said, Weil advised Insys with its pending bankruptcy as the company helped the government investigate its former executives, including Simon.
Even though Covington & Burling was advising Insys on criminal and civil matters, the company’s dealings with prosecutors were “inextricably” linked to its bankruptcy, Simon argued.
“On information and belief, these complex financial agreements must have been reached as part of Insys’s long-running effort to resolve its own criminal case, which included cooperating in Mr. Simon’s criminal case and that of his co-defendants,” wrote Simon’s new lawyers at Fick & Marx.
U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs of the District of Massachusetts on Tuesday partly granted his motion to submit supplement arguments seeking a new trial. She gave Simon through Sept. 9 to file a brief with more details.
In a statement, a Weil representative said at no point was the firm representing adverse interests and said Simon was aware of its work for Insys “at the outset.”
“In addition, Weil did not provide any advice to Insys or communicate with its other legal counsel with respect to whatever cooperation Insys provided to the Department of Justice in connection with the deferred prosecution agreement,” the statement continued.
Daniel Marx, a lawyer at Fick & Marx who is representing Simon, declined to comment.
The criminal case against Simon and other Insys executives, including CEO John Kapoor, has been closely watched. Prosecutors accused the defendants of pushing off-label uses of Subsys, which was approved to treat intense, so-called breakthrough cancer pain, in a way that was no different that drug dealers on street corners. They said the convictions they secured struck a blow against the opioid epidemic that has ravaged much of the U.S.
One piece of evidence that received widespread media coverage was an Insys sales video that featured a man dressed up as a Subsys bottle and employees of the company rapping about increasing high-dose prescriptions.
The original motion for a new trial and acquittal filed by Simon and his co-defendants is still being briefed, with final papers set to be filed by Aug. 30.
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 Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLife Sciences M&A Set to Boom, Litigation to Remain Steady Under New Trump Admin
5 minute readMeeting Deals Where They Are: Corporate Midmarket Deal Team of the Year
Husch Blackwell Becomes First Am Law 100 Firm to Launch Psychedelics Practice
'Honest Critique From Mom': Litigators' Families Helped Hone Virtual Technique in Drug Companies' Major Opioid Trial Win
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Big Law Expected To Follow Milbank's Lead With Associate Year-End Bonuses
- 2Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-58
- 3Sweet James Clinches $17.4M Personal Injury Jury Verdict in California's Kings County
- 4In Lame-Duck Session, US Senate Confirms Illinois Federal Judge on Bipartisan Vote
- 5Gordon Rees Opens 80th Office, ‘Collaboration Hub’ in Palo Alto
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250