Supreme Court Pauses Opioid Settlement With Sacklers Pending Review
Thank goodness that the Supreme Court has paused the horrendous opioid settlement with the Sackler family, for further consideration. Many multiple hundreds of thousands of Americans have died and are still dying because of their incredibly evil schemes to hook people on their murderous brew.
So what that they are offering a $6billion settlement if the government agrees to shield family members from any future penalties! So what if they are able to go “scot-free” to enjoy the $12-20billion they still most likely have stashed in safe places around the globe. SSupreme Court Pauses Opioid Settlement With Sacklers Pending Review
NO!!! They should not be allowed to get away with zero incarcerations for the chief villains of their evil empire! NO!!! they should not be able to live high and mighty off the spoils of their cruelty. Any settlement should be for a much larger amount along with personal criminal liability for the senior Sackler’s involved!
Moreover, considering “The Law of Cause & Effect,” I believe that events are swiftly heading that way!
Supreme Court Pauses Opioid Settlement With Sacklers Pending Review
A federal appeals court had signed off on the agreement, which would shield members of the wealthy Sackler family from opioid-related lawsuits in exchange for billions to resolve thousands of claims.
By Abbie VanSickle and Jan Hoffman
Abbie VanSickle reported from Washington, and Jan Hoffman from New York.
The Supreme Court on Thursday temporarily blocked a bankruptcy deal for Purdue Pharma that would have shielded members of the billionaire Sackler family, which once controlled the company, from additional civil lawsuits over the opioid epidemic and that capped the Sacklers’ personal liability at $6 billion.
The order is likely to delay any payments to the thousands of plaintiffs who have sued the Sacklers and Purdue, the maker of the prescription painkiller OxyContin, which is widely blamed for igniting the opioid crisis. Under the deal, the Sacklers had agreed to pay billions to plaintiffs in exchange for full immunity from all civil legal disputes.
The order was in response to a Justice Department objection to the plan, which the government said allowed members of the Sackler family to take advantage of legal protections meant for debtors in “financial distress,” not for billionaires.
The justices said they would hear arguments in December to decide whether the agreement is authorized by the U.S. bankruptcy code. The case could have far-reaching implications for similar lawsuits.
That is because the Purdue agreement involves a popular but controversial practice: resolving lawsuits about mass injuriesthrough bankruptcy courts, rather than allowing the cases to make their way through the traditional court system. In many of these agreements, third parties — in this instance, the Sacklers — are shielded from liability without being required to declare bankruptcy.
“What are the Sacklers getting out of this?” said Lindsey Simon, an associate professor at Emory University School of Law and a bankruptcy expert. “They’re getting one deal to be done. Whereas if they didn’t get it, individuals could still sue them forever.”
Put simply, Ms. Simon said, “they get all the benefit with none of the costs.”
A representative for the Sackler family did not respond to a request for comment. A spokeswoman for Purdue Pharma said in a statement it was “confident in the legality” of the bankruptcy plan.
The court’s decision to hear the case adds to the uncertainty around the plan to compensate states, local governments, tribes and individuals harmed by the opioid crisis, while offering protection for the Sackler family. Plaintiffs will also most likely have to wait at least another year before they receive payouts from the Purdue deal.
Any ruling in the case could affect how other mass tort cases — a broad term for lawsuits claiming injuries for a group of people who have suffered from things like an airplane crash, a toxic spill or pesticide spraying — play out.
“They’re taking on a question that’s literally the basis for billions of dollars in mass torts, from cases involving not just opioids, but the Boy Scouts, wildfires and allegations of sexual abuse in the church diocese — where third parties get a benefit from a bankruptcy they themselves aren’t going through,” said Adam Zimmerman, a law professor at the University of Southern California.
Experts cited Johnson & Johnson, which has sought to use bankruptcy court to resolve mass claims about its talcum-based baby powder.
The company faces about 40,000 lawsuits that have been on hold since 2021 over allegations that the powder contained asbestos and caused ovarian cancer. The company denies those allegations, and has said it needs the bankruptcy process to resolve current and future lawsuits.
The court’s decision is the latest twist in the yearslong legal battle over compensation for those harmed by the opioid crisis.
In May, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit approved the settlement plan after Purdue Pharma filed for bankruptcy protection in September 2019. At the time, the company and members of the Sackler family collectively faced thousands of lawsuits concerning opioids.
Although companies routinely seek bankruptcy protection to be shielded from legal claims, this particular agreement was unusual because it extended liability protection to the company’s owners. Sackler family members have said they would not sign on to a settlement without an agreement protecting them from lawsuits.
The Supreme Court has been skeptical of some aggressive litigation tactics, notably in cases involving class actions and patents, suggesting that it may be wary of allowing bankruptcy courts to provide legal immunity to rich and powerful people accused of grave wrongdoing who have not themselves declared bankruptcy.
The U.S. Trustee Program, an office in the Justice Department that oversees the administration of bankruptcy cases, has long argued that bankruptcy judges do not have the power to permanently block lawsuits against company owners if those owners have not sought personal bankruptcy protection.
In its brief, the government said that federal appeals courts were split on the issue and that the Purdue agreement could set a troubling precedent.
“Allowing the Court of Appeals’ decision to stand would leave in place a road map for wealthy corporations and individuals to misuse the bankruptcy system to avoid mass tort liability,” the solicitor general, Elizabeth B. Prelogar, wrote.
The appeals court, Ms. Prelogar wrote, had “pinned itself firmly on one side of a widely acknowledged circuit split about an important and recurring question of bankruptcy law.”
Ms. Prelogar called the agreement “a release from liability that is of exceptional and unprecedented breadth” given the “untold number of claimants who did not specifically consent to the release’s terms.” Ultimately, she added, the deal “constitutes an abuse of the bankruptcy system and raises serious constitutional questions.”
In its brief, lawyers for Purdue Pharma had countered that the government’s request to pause the deal was “baseless.” If the court granted it, they wrote, it “would harm victims and needlessly delay the distribution of billions of dollars to abate the opioid crisis.”
Members of the Sackler family are no longer on the board of the company. When the bankruptcy is completed, they will relinquish their ownership stake in the company, which would be renamed Knoa Pharma. However, the family remains wealthy, with some estimates putting its fortune at $11 billion.
Victims’ groups and entities that had expected to receive funds to combat the opioid crisis expressed frustration at the government’s challenge, raising concerns that it would further hamper payments to those harmed.
“We are very disappointed with the additional delay, but it does appear they are seeking to resolve as quickly as possible,” said Joe Rice, a lead lawyer for local governments that had negotiated with Purdue Pharma.
Ryan Hampton, a person in recovery who was a co-chair of the unsecured creditors committee in the Purdue bankruptcy, said he was pleased that the Supreme Court would hear the case.
Still, he added that he hoped it would be “decided by letter of the law and not politicized any further at the expense of the victims, who have been waiting over two years for their share of the settlement.”
Representatives for Native American tribes, which have been hard hit by the opioid crisis, said the money was urgently needed to prevent more deaths. Nearly 575 tribes in the United States are set to share in the Purdue settlement.
“The nation’s tribes cannot wait years for the help that was to come two years ago from the Purdue bankruptcy settlement, when all the while the bankruptcy estate continues being whittled away,” said Lloyd B. Miller, a lawyer who represents tribes that sued Purdue Pharma.
Mr. Miller said he was hopeful the case would move swiftly, adding, “Time is the enemy.”
Kirkus Reviews, the gold-standard for independent & accurate reviews, has this to say about
What Goes Around Comes Around:
A stable, positive, non preachy, objective voice makes the book stand apart from others in the genre. A successful guide that uses anecdotes to reveal powerful truths about life.
~ Kirkus Reviews
“I’ve read a number of books that focus on sharing a similar message, including “The Secret” by Rhonda Byrne, “The Answer” by John Assaraf & Murray Smith, “The Celestine Prophecy” by James Redfield, “Think and Grow Rich,” by Napoleon Hill, and I must say that I find Rob’s to be my favorite.” – Sheryl Woodhouse, founder of Livelihood Matters LLC
Supreme Court Pauses Opioid Settlement With Sacklers Pending Review
Supreme Court Pauses Opioid Settlement With Sacklers Pending Review
Here’s a case of “Group malfeasance, blamed on poor judgement, from the consumption of too much wine!” A nine month investigation of the American chapter of “The Court of Master Sommeliers” has revealed a widespread expectation/demand of sexual favors in return for mentoring female applicants, undergoing the rigorous exam process, required for membership and recognition as an official Sommellier.
This follows the complaint of 21 women that their supposed mentors, had pressured them for sex, apparently a well-established condition with a long history. So far 22 men have been investigated.
The point being, that when a lowly activity becomes “institutionalized” in a grouping of people, ie: company, sport, union, association, religion, etc, it can go on undetected for a long time. It may even acquire an almost “accepted as part of the game” kind of cover, with those participating considering it, “just one of their perks”, and no big deal! That is, until someone blows the lid off.
That’s when everything changes for those who took part. It is not after all, that they didn’t know there was something amiss about the game they were playing. They just thought they had a really good cover! Instead, that cover just went poof, as all covers eventually do. Just another example that, “What Goes Around Comes Around!” Its just difficult to predict when.
Colombo Family Crime Boss and 12 Others Are Arrested, Prosecutors Say
An indictment unsealed on Tuesday accuses the organization of orchestrating a two-decade scheme to extort a labor union.
By Rebecca Davis O’Brien
For two decades, the leadership of the Colombo crime family extorted a Queens labor union, federal prosecutors said — an effort that continued unabated even as members of the mob clan cycled through prison, the family’s notorious longtime boss died, and as federal law enforcement closed in.
Over time, what began as a Colombo captain’s shakedown of a union leader, complete with expletive-laced threats of violence, expanded into a cottage industry, prosecutors said, as the Colombo organization assumed control of contracting and union business, with side operations in phony construction certificates, marijuana trafficking and loan-sharking.
On Tuesday, 11 reputed members and associates of the Colombo crime family, including the mob clan’s entire leadership, were charged in a labor racketeering case brought by the U.S. attorney’s office in Brooklyn.
All but two of the men were arrested Tuesday morning across New York and New Jersey, prosecutors said. Another was surrendered to the authorities on Tuesday; another defendant, identified as the family consigliere, remained at large, prosecutors said.
The indictment accuses the Colombo family of orchestrating a two-decade scheme to extort an unnamed labor union that represented construction workers, using threats of violence to secure payments and arrange contracts that would benefit the crime family.
The charges are an ambitious effort by the U.S. attorney’s office in Brooklyn and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to take down one of the city’s five Mafia families. In addition to the union extortion scheme, which is the heart of the racketeering charge, the indictment charges several misdeeds often associated with the mob, including drug trafficking, money laundering, loan-sharking and falsifying federal labor safety paperwork.
Detention hearings for the defendants in Brooklyn federal court continued into the evening Tuesday, as they entered not-guilty pleas to the charges; prosecutors had asked the court to keep 10 of the defendants in custody.
“Everything we allege in this investigation proves history does indeed repeat itself,” Michael J. Driscoll, F.B.I. assistant director-in-charge, said in a statement. “The underbelly of the crime families in New York City is alive and well.”
Around 2001, prosecutors said, Vincent Ricciardo — a reported captain in the family, also known as “Vinny Unions” — began to demand a portion of a senior labor union official’s salary. When Mr. Ricciardo was convicted and imprisoned on federal racketeering charges in the mid-2000s, prosecutors said, his cousin continued to collect those payments.
Starting in late 2019, prosecutors said, the senior leadership of the Colombo family became directly involved in the shakedown, which extended to broader efforts to siphon money from the union: for example, manipulating the selection of union health fund vendors to contract with entities connected to the family, and diverting more than $10,000 each month from the fund to the family.
Andrew Russo, 87, who prosecutors describe as the family boss, is accused of taking part in those efforts, as well as a money-laundering scheme to send the proceeds of the union extortion through intermediaries to Colombo associates. He was among nine defendants charged with racketeering.
Mr. Russo appeared in court virtually from the hospital Tuesday; he is set to be detained upon his release, pending a future bail hearing.
The family’s infamous longtime boss, Carmine J. Persico, died in federal custody in North Carolina in March 2019.
Federal law enforcement learned of the extortion scheme about a year ago, prosecutors wrote in a court filing Tuesday; investigators gathered thousands of hours of wiretapped calls and conversations recorded by a confidential witness, wrote the prosecutors, who also described law-enforcement surveillance of meetings among the accused conspirators.
The authorities said they repeatedly captured Mr. Ricciardo and his associates threatening to kill the union official. “I’ll put him in the ground right in front of his wife and kids,” Mr. Ricciardo was recorded saying in June.
On another occasion cited by prosecutors in the memo seeking his detention, Mr. Ricciardo directed the union official to hire a consultant selected by the Colombo family, saying: “It’s my union and that’s it.” Prosecutors said his activities were overseen by a Colombo soldier and the consigliere who remains at large.
Much of the activity outlined in the indictment took place while the defendants were either in prison or on supervised release for prior federal mob-related convictions. Theodore Persico Jr., described as a family captain and soldier, was released from federal prison in 2020 and, despite a directive not to associate with members of organized crime, “directed much of the labor racketeering scheme,” prosecutors said.
Mr. Persico, 58, is set to inherit the role of boss after Mr. Russo, prosecutors wrote.
Several of the defendants were named in what prosecutors described as a fraudulent safety training scheme, in which they falsified state and federal paperwork that is required for construction workers to show they have completed safety training courses.
One of the defendants, John Ragano — whom prosecutors say is a soldier in the Bonanno crime family — is accused of setting up phony occupational safety training schools in New York, which prosecutors said were “mills” that provided fraudulent safety training certificates to hundreds of people.
In October 2020, prosecutors said, an undercover law enforcement officer visited one of the schools in Ozone Park, Queens, and received, from Mr. Ricciardo’s cousin, a blank test form and an answer sheet; weeks later, the agent returned to pick up his federal safety card and paid $500.
The purported schools were also used for meetings with members of La Cosa Nostra — the group of crime families commonly known as the Mafia — and to store illegal drugs and fireworks, according to the indictment.
Mr. Ragano wasn’t charged on the racketeering count, although prosecutors also sought his detention pending trial. In addition to the racketeering count, several defendants, including Mr. Ricciardo and his cousin, were charged with extortion, conspiracy, fraud and conspiracy to make false statements.
William K. Rashbaum contributed reporting.
Correction:
An earlier version of this article misstated the number of people identified in an indictment as members of the Colombo crime family. It is 11, not more than a dozen.