Table 3.

Civil Tort Objectives Achieved in Representative Opioid Settlements

Case	Claims	Tort Objectives Achieved
		Compensation	Deterrence	Accountability
2007 27 State Attorneys General (OR, AZ, AR, CA, CT, ID, IL, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MT, NE, NV, NM, NC, OH, PA, SC, TN, TX, VT, VA, WA, WI, DC) v. Purdue Pharma (state court)	Misrepresentations in off-label marketing of OxyContin Failure to adequately disclose OxyContin’s risk for abuse and diversion	$19.5 million, divided among the states	Stop false, misleading, or deceptive claims re: OxyContin Stop excessive/abusive advertising practices and all off-label marketing Establish internal abuse-and-diversion detection program	No fault admitted Publicity and information about settlement terms
2015 Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Purdue Pharma L.P. (state court)	Misrepresentations in marketing activities promoting OxyContin from 1996 to 2001	$24 million (installments over 8 years)	Payments go to a restricted fund for public health initiatives, including addiction treatment	No fault admitted Publicity and information about settlement terms Judge unsealed court documents to make Purdue practices known to the public
2016 United States v. Cardinal Health (federal court)	Failure to identify and report suspicious orders of opioid medications in violation of the CSA Failure to meet recordkeeping responsibilities under the CSA	$44 million	Comply with CSA reporting requirements at temporarily heightened standard Implement new internal structures for monitoring compliance	Fault admitted re: failure to report suspicious shipments Public settlement terms
2016 United States v. McKesson Corporation (federal court)	Failure to comply with 2008 agreement with DOJ for reporting violations under the CSA, particularly regarding oxycodone and hydrocodone Inadequate design & implementation of detection and reporting system under CSA Failure to protect against diversion of narcotic medication at a dozen distribution centers	$150 million	Comply with CSA reporting requirements at temporarily heightened standard Implement new internal structures for monitoring compliance Suspend operations at four distribution centers for period of 1–3 years Implement “first of its kind” internal monitoring system featuring independent review board Comply with heightened CSA standards for 5-year period	Fault admitted re: failure to report suspicious shipments Public settlement terms
2017 United States v. Mallinckrodt (federal court)	Failure to identify and report suspicious orders to the DEA, particularly regarding oxycodone, in violation of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) Additional CSA violations from recordkeeping practices at manufacturing plants	$35 million	Enter novel “parallel agreement” with the DEA to monitor and allow access to downstream purchasing information, or “chargeback” data Comply with additional monitoring and recordkeeping procedures to prevent diversion	No fault admitted Public settlement terms
2017 United States v. Costco (federal court)	Improperly filling prescriptions that were non-compliant with CSA requirements Violating CSA recordkeeping provisions at pharmacies and distribution centers	$11.75 million	Invest in new pharmacy back-end management system to facilitate CSA compliance Implement internal audit system with 3-years of unfettered access for DEA inspections	Fault admitted re: violations of CSA obligations Public settlement terms
2017 United States v. Safeway (federal court)	Alaska & Washington pharmacies locations lost track of tens of thousands of hydrocodone tablets due to inadequate monitoring Insufficient compliance with CSA monitoring requirements to prevent diversion at pharmacies across the company	$3 million	Invest in new pharmacy back-end management system to facilitate CSA compliance Implement internal audit system with 3-years of unfettered access for DEA inspections Implement monitoring and reporting systems for CSA compliance Comply with heightened standards for temporary punitive period	Fault admitted re: failure to report missing medications in a timely fashion Public settlement terms
2019 State of Oklahoma v. Purdue Pharma (state court)	Deceptive marketing of opioid medications to overstate their efficacy and falsely downplay their addiction risks	$270 million, $102.5 million of which goes to OSU Center for Wellness and Recovery; $60 million to pay outside counsel; $12.5 million to political subdivisions of OK	Stop marketing opioid analgesic medications in OK state in perpetuity	No fault admitted Public settlement terms