Pennsylvania judge rules in favor of state in opioid settlement dispute with Philadelphia’s district attorney

District Attorney Larry Krasner sued the state Attorney General’s in 2021 over an opioid lawsuit settlement, saying the agreement would not bring enough money to the city.

A Pennsylvania appellate court ruled in favor of the state on Friday in a long-running legal dispute over whether state or local prosecutors have the right to enter into settlements in ongoing lawsuits against opioid painkiller distributors.

In 2021, then-Attorney General Josh Shapiro, along with other state attorneys general, brokered a $26 billion settlement in dozens of lawsuits against several major distributors and manufacturers of opioid painkillers.

These companies are largely blamed for fueling a deadly drug epidemic that led to skyrocketing rates of addiction and overdose deaths — claims they have denied. Philadelphia has been particularly hard-hit by the opioid crisis; in 2022, 1,413 people fatally overdosed here, the highest death toll the city has recorded.

Under Shapiro’s settlement, Pennsylvania stood to gain $1 billion over 18 years, but then-Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney and District Attorney Larry Krasner criticized the agreement, saying that Philadelphia would not receive enough money.

Both the city and Krasner had filed lawsuits against opioid manufacturers. Kenney eventually signed on to Shapiro’s settlement, but Krasner continued to pursue his claim. Along with Pittsburgh District Attorney Stephen Zappala, the district attorney sued Shapiro over the settlement in 2021, saying that the Attorney General’s office didn’t have the right to settle civil claims on his behalf. (Shapiro has since been elected governor of Pennsylvania.)

The court ruling

In the ruling, Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court Judge Michael H. Wojcik wrote that the state’s top prosecutor does have the power to enter into civil settlements on behalf of Pennsylvania residents, superseding claims from local district attorneys.

While the Attorney General has little power to weigh in on criminal cases, Wojcik said in the 23-page opinion, it has broader powers in civil lawsuits like the opioid settlements.

“Any uncertainty or inconsistency about the Commonwealth’s position in separate litigations must result in deference to the Attorney General,” Wojcik wrote.

In addition, he said, the settlements negotiated by the attorneys general — which both Philadelphia and Pittsburgh city officials eventually signed onto — have already won all the legal remedies available to state residents in such cases, including civil penalties and payments to victims of opioid use.

So even if the court had ruled that Krasner and Zappala could continue their lawsuits, “there is nothing left for them to obtain,” Wojcik wrote.

City officials did not comment on the ruling on Friday. Through a spokesperson, Krasner declined comment, saying the office was considering its legal options. The current state Attorney General Michelle Henry, said she was pleased with the decision.

“We have always believed that all counties in Pennsylvania working together is the best way to hold the pharmaceutical companies accountable while helping communities repair and rebuild from the devastation caused by lethally-addictive opiates,” Henry said in a statement.

Last year, Philadelphia officials announced their initial plans to spend the first installments of the funding they will receive under Shapiro’s settlement, including mobile methadone vans that can get people quickly into addiction treatment, and funding to help repair homes and parks in Kensington, the neighborhood most affected by the opioid crisis.

©2024 The Philadelphia Inquirer. Visit inquirer.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.