BALTIMORE — A judge has determined that jurors significantly overstepped in their financial award to the city in a major drug-related case against two pharmaceutical giants. Following a verdict last November that held McKesson and AmerisourceBergen accountable for exacerbating Baltimore’s opioid crisis, the presiding judge suggested modifying the initial damages awarded from $266 million to just $52 million.
Baltimore City Circuit Judge Lawrence Fletcher-Hill ruled that the jurors’ decision was “grossly excessive” and prompted concern, stating that the initial verdict was “shocking” given the presented evidence. The case centered around claims that the companies had contributed to the distribution of excessive quantities of painkillers in the region, thereby playing a central role in the city’s ongoing struggle with opioid addiction.
In defense, attorneys representing McKesson and AmerisourceBergen contended that it was unreasonable to attribute the majority of the crisis—97%—to their firms. They argued the roots of the epidemic also lay in the prevalence of illegal street drugs like heroin and fentanyl. The lawyers urged Judge Fletcher-Hill to overturn the jurors’ decision, either by reducing the monetary award or ordering a new trial to reassess the damages.
In his ruling, the judge provided the city with two options: accept a reduced damages amount of $52 million or proceed with a new trial that would determine the appropriate compensation. This development marks a significant turn in a legal battle that has underscored the ongoing struggle against the opioid epidemic in Baltimore and beyond.
The ruling will likely influence future litigation as cities and states seek accountability from pharmaceutical companies for their roles in the opioid crisis. The litigation landscape remains complex, as varying opinions exist about the level of responsibility that manufacturers bear in these public health emergencies.
As communities continue to grapple with the fallout of opioid addiction, the outcomes of such legal battles could have lasting implications for public health policy and corporate accountability.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by emailing contact@publiclawlibrary.org.