ALLERGAN PUBLIC GLOBAL OPIOID SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
I.
Definitions........................................................................................................................................ 2 II.
Participation by States and Condition to Preliminary Agreement ........................................... 18 III.
Cessation of Litigation Activities................................................................................................. 19 IV.
Injunctive Relief............................................................................................................................ 20 V.
Release............................................................................................................................................20 VI.
Monetary Relief Overview and Maximum Payments................................................................ 25 VII.
Annual Payments to Settlement Fund......................................................................................... 26 VIII.
Allocation and Use of Settlement Funds..................................................................................... 38 IX.
Participation by Subdivisions and Special Districts.................................................................. 44 X.
Condition to Effectiveness of Agreement and Filing of Consent Judgment ............................ 49 XI.
Potential Payment Adjustments................................................................................................... 49 XII.
Additional Restitution Amount.................................................................................................... 50 XIII.
Plaintiffs' Attorneys' Fees and Costs.......................................................................................... 51 XIV.
Enforcement and Dispute Resolution.......................................................................................... 51 XV.
Judgment and Settlement Set -Off Related to Teva.................................................................... 57 XVI.
Miscellaneous.................................................................................................................................58 1 December 20, 2022
ALLERGAN PUBLIC GLOBAL OPIOID SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Whereas, the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, Participating Special Districts, and Allergan (as those terms are defined below) share a common desire to resolve disputes between them relating to opioid medications according to the terms set out in this agreement dated as of November 22, 2022 (the "Agreement");
Whereas, the Parties, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts agree and understand that upon satisfaction of the conditions set forth in Sections II and XI, this Agreement will be binding on the Settling States, Allergan, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts;
Whereas, the Parties, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts agree and understand that this Agreement will then be filed as part of Consent Judgments in the respective courts of each of the Settling States, pursuant to the terms set forth in Section III; Whereas, the Parties, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts agree and understand that they shall at all times act in good faith to implement and execute their obligations under this Agreement and shall not act in any way to purposefully frustrate the right of any party to receive the benefits due under the Agreement; Whereas, the Parties, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts to this Agreement now desire to avoid further expense and proceedings and to settle their disputes under the terms and conditions of this Agreement as set forth below; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED by and between the Parties, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts by and through their respective counsel, as follows:
I. Definitions
Unless otherwise specified, the following definitions apply:
"Abatement Accounts Fund" means a component of the Settlement Fund described in subsection VIII.F.
"Additional Restitution Amount" means the amount available to Settling States listed in Exhibit M of $16,192,680.76.
"Affiliated Company(ies)" means (1) when used with respect to AbbVie Inc. ("AbbVie") all of the entities listed in. Exhibit J-1; (2) when used with respect to Allergan all of the entities listed in Exhibit J-2; and (3) additionally shall include other entities owned now or in the past either wholly or partially and either directly or indirectly by either AbbVie or Allergan and/or each of their respective past parents, but only to the extent those other entities played any role relating to Covered Conduct and/or Released Claims during the period when they were owned 2 December 20, 2022
either wholly or partially and either directly or indirectly by either AbbVie or Allergan and/or each of their respective past parents.
4. "Agreement" means this Allergan Public Global Opioid Settlement Agreement, inclusive of all exhibits.
5. "Alleged Harms" means the alleged past, present, and future financial or societal and related expenditures arising out of the alleged misuse and abuse of opioid products, non-exclusive examples of which are described in the documents listed on Exhibit A, that have allegedly arisen as a result of the physical and bodily injuries sustained by individuals suffering from opioid-related addiction, abuse, death, and other related diseases and disorders, and that have allegedly been caused by Allergan.
6. "Allergan" means Allergan Finance, LLC (f/k/a Actavis, Inc., which, in turn, was f/k/a/ Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) and Allergan Limited (f/k/a Allergan plc, which, in turn, was Fk/a Actavis plc). Allergan does not include Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. ("Teva Ltd."), Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. ("Teva USA"), Cephalon, Inc. ("Cephalon"), Actavis LLC (f/k/a Actavis Inc.) ("Actavis LLC"), Watson Laboratories, Inc. ("Watson"), Actavis Pharma, Inc. (f/k/a Watson Pharma, Inc.) ("Actavis Pharma"), Actavis Elizabeth LLC ("Actavis Elizabeth"), Actavis Kadian LLC ("Actavis Kadian"), Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc. (f/k/a Watson Laboratories, Inc. - Florida) ("Actavis Labs FL"), Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc. (f/k/a Watson Laboratories, Inc. - Utah) ("Actavis Labs U7"), Actavis Mid Atlantic LLC ("Actavis Mid"), Actavis South Atlantic LLC ("Actavis South"), Actavis Totowa LLC ("Actavis Totowa"), or Anda, Inc. ("Anda").
7. "Allocation Statute" means a state law that governs allocation, distribution, and/or use of some or all of the Settlement Fund amounts allocated to that State and/or its Subdivisions and/or its Special Districts. In addition to modifying the allocation, as set forth in subsection VIII.E.2, an Allocation Statute may, without limitation, contain a Statutory Trust, further restrict expenditure of funds, form an advisory committee, establish oversight and reporting requirements, or address other default provisions and other matters related to the funds. An Allocation Statute is not required to address all three (3) types of funds comprising the Settlement Fund or all default provisions.
8. "Annual Payment" means the total amount of the Net Abatement Amount payable into the Settlement Fund by Allergan on each Payment Date (including the Initial Year Payment), as calculated by the Settlement Fund Administrator pursuant to Section VII or agreed to pursuant to Section VILB.6, which shall not exceed the maximum payment for any given year as set forth in Exhibit M. This term does not include the Additional Restitution Amount or amounts paid pursuant to Section XIII.
9. "Appropriate Official" means the official defined in subsection XVI.F.4. 3 December 20, 2022
10. "Attorney Fee and Cost Payment" means the total amount of the Global Settlement Attorney Fee Amount payable by Allergan on the Payment Date of each year into the (1) Attorney Fee and Cost Fund described in Exhibit R, (2) the State Cost Fund described in Exhibit T, and (3) the State Outside Counsel Fee Fund described in Exhibit S, for attorneys' fees, expenses, and costs of the Settling States and Participating Subdivisions.
11. "Attorney Fee and Cost Fund" means an account consisting of $187,115,422.10 to pay attorneys' fees and costs of Litigating Subdivisions that become Participating Subdivisions and the MDL Expense Fund, amounts pursuant to the agreement on attorneys' fees and costs attached as Exhibit R.
12. `Bat" means either (1) a ruling by the highest court of the State, or the intermediate court of appeals when not subject to further review by the highest court of the State in a State with a single intermediate court of appeals, setting forth the general principle that no Subdivisions or Special Districts in the State may maintain Released Claims against Released Entities, whether on the ground of the Agreement (or the release in it) or otherwise; (2) a law barring Subdivisions and Special Districts in the State from maintaining or asserting Released Claims against Released Entities (either through a direct bar or through a grant of authority to release claims and that authority is exercised in full); or (3) a Settlement Class Resolution in the State with full force and effect. For the avoidance of doubt, a law or ruling that is conditioned or predicated upon payment by a Released Entity (apart from payments by Allergan incurred under the Agreement) shall not constitute a Bar.
13. "Base Payment" means the payments made pursuant to Section VII.D.
14. "Case -Specific Resolution" means either (1) a law barring specified Subdivisions or Special Districts from maintaining Released Claims against Released Entities (either through a direct Bar or through a grant of authority to release claims and that authority is exercised in full) or (2) a ruling by a court of competent jurisdiction over a particular Subdivision or Special District that has the legal effect of barring the Subdivision or Special District from maintaining any Released Claims at issue against Released Entities, whether on the ground of the Agreement (or the release in it) or otherwise. For the avoidance of doubt, a law, ruling, or release that is conditioned or predicated upon a post -Effective Date payment by a Released Entity (apart from payments by Allergan incurred under the Agreement or injunctive relief obligations incurred by it) shall not constitute a Case -Specific Resolution.
15. "Claim" means any past, present or future cause of action, claim for relief, cross - claim or counterclaim, theory of liability, demand, derivative, claim, request, assessment, charge, covenant, damage, debt, lien, loss, fine, penalty, restitution, reimbursement, disgorgement, expenses, judgment, right, obligation, dispute, suit, contract, controversy, agreement, parens patriae claim, promise, performance, warranty, omission, or grievance of any nature whatsoever, whether legal, equitable, statutory, regulatory or administrative, whether arising under federal, 4 December 20, 2022
state or local common law, statute, regulation, guidance, ordinance or principles of equity, whether filed or unfiled, whether asserted or unasserted, whether known or unknown, whether accrued or unaccrued, whether foreseen, unforeseen or unforeseeable, whether discovered or undiscovered, whether suspected or unsuspected, whether fixed or contingent, and whether existing or hereafter arising, in all such cases, including but not limited to any request for declaratory, injunctive, or equitable relief, compensatory, punitive, or statutory damages, absolute liability, strict liability, restitution, subrogation, contribution, indemnity, apportionment, disgorgement, reimbursement, attorney fees, expert fees, consultant fees, fines, penalties, expenses, costs or any other legal, equitable, civil, administrative, or regulatory remedy whatsoever. Claim does not include any individuals' personal injury or wrongful death cause of action.
16. "Claim Oven" means a Claim asserted by a Non -Released Entity against a Released Entity on the basis of contribution, indemnity, or other claim over on any theory relating to a Non -Party Covered Conduct Claim asserted by a Releasor.
17. "Compensatory Restitution Amount" means the aggregate amount of payments by Allergan hereunder other than amounts paid as attorneys' fees and costs or identified pursuant to subsection VIII.0 as being used to pay attorneys' fees and investigation costs or litigation costs.
18. "Consent Judgment" means a state -specific consent judgment, the general terms of which shall be agreed by the Settling States and Allergan prior to the Reference Date and shall include (1) approval of this Agreement and (2) the release set forth in Section V, including the full and final resolution of any Released Claims that the Settling State has brought against Released Entities.
19. "Count" means the respective court for each Settling State to which the Agreement and the Consent Judgment are presented for approval and/or entry as to that Settling State, or the Northern District of Ohio for purposes of administering the Attorney Fee and Cost Fund and any related fee and cost agreements.
20. "Covered Conduct" means any actual or alleged act, failure to act, negligence, statement, error, omission, breach of any duty, conduct, event, transaction, agreement, service, work, misstatement, misleading statement, or other activity of any kind whatsoever from the beginning of time through the Reference Date of this Agreement (and any past, present, or future consequence of any such act, failure to act, negligence, statement, error, omission, breach of duty, conduct, event, transaction, agreement, service, work, misstatement, misleading statement, or other activity) arising from or relating in any way to (a) the availability, discovery, research, development, manufacture, packaging, repackaging, marketing, promotion, advertising, labeling, relabeling, recall, withdrawal, distribution, delivery, monitoring, reporting, supply, sale, prescribing, dispensing, physical security, warehousing, use or abuse of, or operating procedures relating to, any Product, or any system, plan, policy, procedure, or advocacy relating to any Product or class of Products, including, but not limited to, any unbranded or branded 5 December 20, 2022
promotion, marketing, or advertising, unbranded information, patient support or assistance, educational programs, consultancy, research, or other programs, campaigns, lobbying, or grants, sponsorships, charitable donations, or other funding relating to any Product or class of Products; (b) the characteristics, properties, risks, or benefits of any Product or class of Products; (e) the monitoring, reporting, disclosure, non -monitoring, non -reporting, or non -disclosure to federal, state, or other regulators of orders for any Product or class of Products; (d) the selective breeding, harvesting, extracting, purifying, exporting, importing, applying for quota for, procuring quota for, handling, promoting, manufacturing, processing, packaging, supplying, distributing, converting, or selling of, or otherwise engaging in any activity relating to, a precursor or component of Product, including but not limited to natural, synthetic, semi -synthetic, or chemical raw materials, starting materials, finished active pharmaceutical ingredients, drug substances, or any related intermediate of Product; and/or (e) diversion control programs or suspicious order monitoring related to any Product. The foregoing is not intended to apply to claims alleging contamination of products.
21. "Covered Special Districts" means a Special District that is (1) a school district with K-12 student enrollment of at least 25,000 or 0.12% of a State's population, whichever is greater; (2) a fire district that covers a population of 25,000, or 0.20% of a State's population if a State's population is greater than 18 million (though, if a fire district's population is not easily calculable from state data sources and agreed to between the State and Allergan, it is calculated by dividing the population of the county or counties a fire district serves by the number of fire districts in the county or counties); or (3) a healthcare district or hospital district with at least 125 hospital beds in one or more hospitals rendering services in that district.
22. "Designated State" means New York.
23. "Divested Actavis Generic Entity(ies)" means Actavis LLC, Watson, Actavis Pharma, Actavis Elizabeth, Actavis Kadian, Actavis Labs FL, Actavis Labs UT, Actavis Mid, Actavis South, and Actavis Totowa.
24. "Divested Entity(ies)" means those companies listed on Exhibit J-3, which includes the Divested Actavis Generic Entities.
25. "Effective Date" means the date sixty (60) days after the Reference Date.
26. "Eligible State" means a State that is not a Prior Settling State and is thus eligible to participate in this Agreement and become a Settling State.
27. "Enforcement Committee" means a committee consisting of representatives of the Settling States and of the Participating Subdivisions. Exhibit B contains the organizational bylaws of the Enforcement Committee. Notice pursuant to subsection XVI.P shall be provided when there are changes in membership or contact information.
6 December 20, 2022
28. "Exhibit G Participant" means a Participating Subdivision or Participating Special District that appears in Exhibit G at the relevant point in time. Nothing about the use of the term Exhibit G Participant changes the ability to amend the list of entities listed on Exhibit G pursuant to this Agreement.
29. "Global Settlement Abatement Amount" means the total abatement amount of $2,149,873,027.00. (This figure does not reflect the application of the Prior Settlements Credit or potential offsets. It also does not include amounts paid to the Additional Restitution Amount, which may be used for abatement.)
30. "Global Settlement Amount" means $2,372,972,184.12 and consists of the Global Settlement Abatement Amount, the Global Settlement Attorney Fee Amount, and the Additional Restitution Amount.
31. "Global Settlement Attorney Fee Amount" means $206,906,476.36, which consists of the Attorney Fee and Cost Fund, the State Outside Counsel Fee Fund, and the State Cost Fund.
32. "Implementation Administrator" means the vendor agreed to by the Parties and retained by Teva and Allergan to provide notice pursuant to Section X.A and to manage the initial joinder period for Subdivisions and Special Districts, including the issuance and receipt of Settlement Participation Forms.
33. "Implementation Costs" means the costs for the Implementation Administrator, which shall be paid for pursuant to subsection VI.D.
34. "Incentive A" means the incentive payment described in subsection VII.E.5.
35. "Incentive B" means the incentive payment described in subsection VII.E.6.
36. "Incentive C" means the incentive payment described in subsection VII.E.7.
37. "Incentive D" means the incentive payment described in subsection VII.E.8.
38. "Incentive Payment" means the payments made pursuant to Section VII.E.
39. "Initial Participating Special District" means a Special District that meets the requirements set forth in subsection IX.L.
40. "Initial Participating Subdivision" means a Subdivision that meets the requirements set forth in subsection IX.D.
41. "Initial Participation Date" means the date ninety (90) days after the Preliminary Agreement Date, unless it is extended by written agreement of Allergan and the Enforcement Committee.
42. "Initial Year Payment" means the first Annual Payment of the Net Abatement Amount payable into the Settlement Fund by Allergan on the Payment Date as 7 December 20, 2022
calculated by the Settlement Fund Administrator pursuant to Section VII or agreed to pursuant to Section VII.B.6, which shall not exceed the maximum payment for the Initial Year Payment as set forth in Exhibit M.
43. "Injunctive Relief Terms" means the terms described in Section IV and set forth in Exhibit P.
44. "Later Litigating Special District" means a Special District (or Special District official asserting the right of or for the Special District to recover for Alleged Harms to the Special District and/or the people thereof) that is not a Litigating Special District and that files a lawsuit bringing a Released Claim against a Released Entity, or that adds such a Claim to a pre-existing lawsuit, after the Preliminary Agreement Date. It may also include a Litigating Special District whose Claims were resolved by a Bar or Case -Specific Resolution, which is later revoked following the execution date of this Agreement, when such Litigating Special District takes any affirmative step in its lawsuit other than seeking a stay, removal or dismissal with prejudice.
45. "Later Litigating Subdivision" means a Subdivision (or Subdivision official asserting the right of or for the Subdivision to recover for Alleged Harms to the Subdivision and/or the people thereof) that is not a Litigating Subdivision and that files a lawsuit bringing a Released Claim against a Released Entity, or that adds such a Claim to a pre-existing lawsuit, after the Preliminary Agreement Date. It may also include a Litigating Subdivision whose Claims were resolved by a Bar or Case -Specific Resolution, which is later revoked following the execution date of this Agreement, when such Litigating Subdivision takes any affirmative step in its lawsuit other than seeking a stay, removal, or dismissal with prejudice.
46. "Later Participating Special District' means a Participating Special District that meets the requirements of subsection IX.M but is not an Initial Participating Special District.
47. "Later Participating Subdivision" means a Participating Subdivision that meets the requirements of subsection IX.E but is not an Initial Participating Subdivision.
48. "Litigating Special District" means a Special District (or Special District official asserting the right of or for the Special District to recover for Alleged Harms to the Special District and/or the people thereof) that brought any Released Claims against any Released Entities on or before the Preliminary Agreement Date that were not separately resolved prior to that date. Exhibit C includes an agreed list of the Litigating Special Districts. Exhibit C will be updated (including with any corrections) periodically, and a final version of Exhibit C will be attached hereto as of the Effective Date.
49. "Litigating Subdivision" means a Subdivision (or Subdivision official asserting the right of or for the Subdivision to recover for Alleged Harms to the Subdivision and/or the people thereof) that brought any Released Claims against any Released 8 December 20, 2022
Entities on or before the Preliminary Agreement Date that were not separately resolved prior to that date. A Prior Settling Subdivision shall not be considered a Litigating Subdivision. Exhibit C includes an agreed list of the Litigating Subdivisions. Exhibit C will be updated (including with any corrections) periodically, and a final version of Exhibit C will be attached hereto as of the Effective Date.
50. "National Arbitration Panel" means the panel described in subsection XIV.G.4.
51. "National Disputes" means the disputes described in subsection XIV.G.
52. "Net Abatement Amount" means $1,799,186,751.00, which is the Global Settlement Abatement Amount adjusted for the Prior Settlements Credit pursuant to subsection VI.C.2.
53. "Non -Litigating Covered Special District" means a Covered Special District that is not a Litigating Special District.
54. "Non -Litigating Special District" means a Special District that is neither a Litigating Special District nor a Later Litigating Special District.
55. "Non -Litigating Subdivision" means a Subdivision that is not (1) a Litigating Subdivision, (2) a Later Litigating Subdivision, or (3) a Prior Settling Subdivision.
56. "Non -Participating Special District" means a Special District that is not a Participating Special District.
57. "Non -Participating Subdivision" means a Subdivision that is not a Participating Subdivision. For the avoidance of doubt, Non -Participating Subdivision also includes Prior Settling Subdivisions.
58. "Non -Party Covered Conduct Claim" means a Claim against any Non -Released Entity involving, arising out of, or related to Covered Conduct (or conduct that would be Covered Conduct if engaged in by a Released Entity).
59. "Non -Party Settlement" means a settlement by any Releasor that settles any Non - Parry Covered Conduct Claim and includes a release of any Non -Released Entity.
60. "Non -Released Entity" means an entity that is not a Released Entity.
61. "Non -Settling State" means a State that is an Eligible State but not a Settling State.
62. "Opioid Remediation" means care, treatment, and other programs and expenditures (including reimbursement for past such programs or expenditures except where this Agreement restricts the use of funds solely to future Opioid Remediation) designed to (1) address the misuse and abuse of opioid products, (2) treat or mitigate opioid use or related disorders, or (3) mitigate other alleged effects of the opioid abuse crisis, including on those injured as a result of the opioid abuse crisis. Exhibit E 9 December 20, 2022
provides a non -exhaustive list of expenditures that qualify as being paid for Opioid Remediation. Qualifying expenditures may include reasonable related administrative expenses.
63. "Participating Special District" means a Special District that signs the Settlement Participation Form annexed hereto as Exhibit K and meets the requirements for becoming a Participating Special District under Section IX. Participating Special Districts include both Initial Participating Special Districts and Later Participating Special Districts.
64. "Participating Subdivision" means a Subdivision that signs a Settlement Participation Form annexed hereto as Exhibit K and meets requirements for becoming a Participating Subdivision under Section IX. Participating Subdivisions include both Initial Participating Subdivisions and Later Participating Subdivisions.
65. "Parties" means Allergan and the Settling States (each, a "Party").
66. "Payment Date" means the date on which Allergan makes its Annual Payments (including its Initial Year Payment), Additional Restitution Payments, and Attorney Fee and Cost Payments, pursuant to Section VII and XIII and Exhibits M-1 and M-
2. The first Payment Date is thirty (30) days after the Effective Date. The second Payment Date is July 15, 2024, the third Payment Date is July 15, 2025, the fourth Payment Date is July 15, 2026, the fifth Payment Date is July 15, 2027, the sixth Payment Date is July 15, 2028, and the seventh Payment Date is July 15, 2029.
67. "Payment Year" means the calendar year during which the applicable Annual Payment is due pursuant to subsection VII.B. Payment Year 1 is 2023, Payment Year 2 is 2024, and so forth. References to payment "for a Payment Year" mean the Annual Payment due that year. References to eligibility "for a Payment Year" mean eligibility in connection with the Annual Payment due during that year.
68. "Preliminary Agreement Date" means the date on which Allergan gives notice to the Settling States and MDL Plaintiffs' Executive Committee of its determination that a sufficient number of States have agreed to be Settling States to proceed with notice pursuant to Section IX.A. This date shall be no more than fourteen (14) days after the end of the notice period to States (as set forth in Section II.A) unless it is extended by written agreement of Allergan and the Enforcement Committee.
69. "Primary Subdivision" means a Subdivision that has a population of 30,000 or more. A list of Primary Subdivisions in each State is provided in Exhibit I, and such list shall be updated if any Primary Subdivision is inadvertently missed or included.
70. "Prior Settlements Credit" means the credit of $350,686,276.00, reflecting that the allocations for Prior Settling States and Prior Settling Subdivisions for Claims related to the Covered Conduct against Allergan and/or other Released Entities were or will be separately settled. The credit is applied pursuant to subsection VI.A.1.
10 December 20, 2022
71. "Prior Settling State(s) " means Florida, Louisiana, New York, Rhode Island, and West Virginia and all Subdivisions and Special Districts within those States whose Claims were released as part of those States' settlements.
72. "Prior Settling Subdivision(s) " means the City and County of San Francisco, California, Cuyahoga County, Ohio, and Summit County, Ohio.
73. "Product" means any chemical substance, whether used for medicinal or non - medicinal purposes, and whether natural, synthetic, or semi -synthetic, or any finished pharmaceutical product made from or with such substance, that is an opioid or opiate, as well as any product containing any such substance. It also includes: 1) the following when used in combination with opioids or opiates: benzodiazepine, carisoprodol, zolpidem, gabapentin, diazepam, estazolam, quazepam, alprazolam, clonazepam, oxazepam, flurazepam, triozolam, temazepam, midazolam; and 2) a combination or "cocktail" of any stimulant or other chemical substance prescribed, sold, bought, or dispensed to be used together that includes opioids or opiates. For the avoidance of doubt, "Product" does not include benzodiazepine, carisoprodol, zolpidem, or gabapentin when not used in combination with opioids or opiates. "Product" includes but is not limited to any substance consisting of or containing buprenorphine, codeine, fentanyl, hydrocodone, hydromorphone, meperidine, methadone, morphine, naloxone, naltrexone, oxycodone, oxymorphone, pentazocine, propoxyphene, tapentadol, tramadol, opium, heroin, carfentanil, any variant of these substances, or any similar substance. "Product" also includes any natural, synthetic, semi -synthetic or chemical raw materials, starting materials, finished active pharmaceutical ingredients, drug substances, and any related intermediate products used or created in the manufacturing process for any of the substances described in the preceding sentence. Further, "Product(s)" includes, but is not limited to, the following: (a) Anexsia, Bancap HC, Combunox, Dilaudid, Dilaudid HP, Duradyne, Esgic with Codeine, Fiorinal with. Codeine, Fioricet with Codeine, Kadian, Lorcet, Lorcet Plus, Maxidone, MoxDuo, Norco, Procet, Reprexain, Vicodin, Vicodin ES, Vicodin HP, and Vicoprofen, and any type, version, strength, or dosage of the foregoing; and (b) Aspirin + butalbital + caffeine + codeine phosphate, Fentanyl citrate injection, Fentanyl citrate tablet, Fentanyl transdermal, Homatropine methylbromide + hydrocodone bitartrate, Hydrocodone + acetaminophen, Hydrocodone + ibuprofen, Hydromorphone tablet, Meperidine hydrochloride injection, Meperidine hydrochloride tablet, Morphine sulfate capsule, Morphine sulfate injection, Morphine sulfate tablet, Oxycodone, Oxycodone + acetaminophen, Oxycodone + aspirin, Oxycodone + hydrochloride, Oxycodone + ibuprofen, Oxymorphone tablet, Tramadol hydrocholoride, and any type, version, strength, or dosage of the foregoing.
74. "Reference Date" means the date on which Allergan is to inform the Settling States and MDL Plaintiffs' Executive Committee of its determination whether there is sufficient resolution of Claims and potential Claims at the Subdivision level to go forward with the settlement. The Reference Date shall be no later than thirty (30) days after the Initial Participation Date, unless it is extended by written agreement of Allergan and the Enforcement Committee.
11 December 20, 2022
75. "Released Claims" means any and all Claims that directly or indirectly are based on, arise out of, or in any way relate to or concern the Covered Conduct occurring prior to the Reference Date. Without limiting the foregoing, "Released Claims" include any Claims that have been asserted against the Released Entities by any Settling State or any of its Litigating Subdivisions or Litigating Special Districts in any federal, state, or local action or proceeding (whether judicial, arbitral, or administrative) based on, relating to, in whole or in part, the Covered Conduct, or any such Claims that could be or could have been asserted now or in the future in those actions or in any comparable action or proceeding brought by a State or any of its Subdivisions or Special Districts or any Releasors (whether or not such State, Subdivision, Special District, or Releasor has brought such action or proceeding).
Released Claims also include all Claims against Released Entities asserted in any proceeding to be dismissed pursuant to the Agreement, whether or not such claims relate to Covered Conduct. "Released Claims" shall be interpreted broadly. This Agreement does not release Claims by private individuals. Claims by private individuals shall be treated in accordance with applicable law. Released Claims is also used herein to describe Claims brought by a Later Litigating Subdivision, Later Litigating Special District, or other non-party Subdivision or Special District that would have been Released Claims if they had been brought by a Releasor against a Released Entity before the Effective Date.
76. "Released Entities" means Allergan and (1) all of Allergan's past and present direct or indirect parents, subsidiaries, divisions, joint ventures, predecessors, successors, affiliates, business units, assigns, agents (all of the foregoing solely in their capacity as such with respect to the Released Claims), and insurers (solely in their role as insurers, if any, with respect to the Released Claims), including, but not limited to, (a) AbbVie and (b) Divested Actavis Generic Entities and other Divested Entities (and their respective past and current parents, subsidiaries, and affiliates, including but not limited to Teva Ltd., Teva USA, and their subsidiaries and affiliates) but solely as to the branded opioid drugs that are Products distributed and/or sold before August 2, 2016 by Divested Actavis Generic Entities and other Divested Entities and the operation of the Divested Actavis Generic Entities and other Divested Entities related to those branded opioid drugs that are Products before August 2, 2016; (2) any person or entity to the extent, and only to the extent, that such person or entity may have a Claim based on such person or entity having a business relationship with Allergan or AbbVie and/or any of Allergan or AbbVie's Affiliated Companies, including, but not limited to, for contractual indemnity, equitable or implied indemnity, contribution, comparative fault, reimbursement, or apportionment (including, but not limited to, the respective past and present direct or indirect parents, subsidiaries, divisions, joint ventures, predecessors, successors, affiliates, business units, assigns, partners, manufacturers, contractors, agents, and insurers (all of the foregoing solely in their capacity as such with respect to the Released Claims) of any of the foregoing in (1), including Abbott Laboratories and Abbott Laboratories Inc. ("Abbott"), provided that, for avoidance of doubt, Abbott is not a Released Entity for purposes of Claims related to OxyContin, Purdue Pharma, or Purdue Pharma Inc.; and (ii) Halo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Shionogi Inc., Mikart, LLC, PDI, Inc., TMS Health, LLC, National Health Information Network, 12 December 20, 2022
Inc., Ventiv Commercial Services, LLC, inVentiv Commercial Services, LLC, UPS Supply Chain Solutions, Inc., and King Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and their respective past and current parents, subsidiaries, and affiliates) against Allergan or AbbVie and/or any of Allergan or AbbVie's Affiliated Companies relating to any Covered Conduct, Products, class of Products, and/or Released Claims arising from such business relationship; and (3) the respective past and present employees, officers, directors, members, shareholders, partners, trustees, contractors, consultants, and agents (all of the foregoing solely in their capacity as such with respect to the Released Claims) of any of the foregoing in (1) and (2). Notwithstanding the foregoing (and subject to certain provisions, including, but not limited to, the Non - Party Settlement at Section V.13.2 and the Set -Off at Section XV below), Released Entities shall exclude Divested Actavis Generic Entities and other Divested Entities (and their respective past and current parents, subsidiaries, and affiliates, including but not limited to Teva Ltd., Teva USA, and their subsidiaries and affiliates, but not Allergan and other Released Entities), but solely as to: (1) their generic opioid drugs that are Products, and/or (ii) the operation of Divested Actavis Generic Entities and other Divested Entities related to those generic opioid drugs that are Products for which Releasors have also sought to hold Allergan (and/or other Released Entities) liable. For the avoidance of doubt, any entity acquired, or joint venture entered into by Allergan after the Reference date is not a Released Entity.
77. "Releasors" means (1) each Settling State; (2) each Participating Subdivision; (3) each Participating Special District; and (4) without limitation and to the maximum extent of the power of each Settling State's Attorney General and/or Participating Subdivision and Participating Special District to release Claims, (a) the Settling State's, Participating Subdivision's, and Participating Special District's departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions, Subdivisions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, including its Attorney General, and any person in their official capacity whether elected or appointed to serve any of the foregoing and any agency, person, or other entity claiming by or through any of the foregoing, (b) any public entities, public instrumentalities, public educational institutions, unincorporated districts, fire districts, irrigation districts, water districts, emergency services districts, school districts, healthcare districts, hospital districts, Sheriffs and law enforcement districts, library districts, coroner's offices, and public transportation authorities, and other Special Districts in a Settling State, including those with the regulatory authority to enforce state and federal controlled substances acts or the authority to bring Claims related to Covered Conduct seeking money (including abatement (or remediation and/or restitution)) or revoke a pharmaceutical distribution license, and (c) any person or entity acting in a parens patriae, sovereign, quasi -sovereign, private attorney general, qui tam, taxpayer, or other capacity seeking relief, including but not limited to, fines, penalties, or punitive damages, on behalf of or generally applicable to the general public with respect to a Settling State or a Subdivision or Special District in a Settling State, whether or not any of them participate in the Agreement. "Releasors" does not include persons acting in an individual capacity, regardless of the type of relief sought. In addition to being a Releasor as provided herein, Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts shall also provide a Settlement 13 December 20, 2022
Participation Form, which is attached as Exhibit K. Each Settling State's Attorney General represents that he or she has or has obtained (or will obtain no later than the Effective Date) the authority set forth in the Representation and Warranty subsection of Section V.
78. "Revocation Event" means with respect to a Bar, Settlement Class Resolution, or Case -Specific Resolution, a legislative amendment or a revocation, rescission, reversal, overruling, or interpretation that in any way limits the effect of such Bar, Settlement Class Resolution, or Case -Specific Resolution on Released Claims or any other action or event that otherwise deprives the Bar, Settlement Class Resolution or Case -Specific Resolution of force or effect in any material respect.
79. "Settlement Class Resolution" means a class action resolution in a court of competent jurisdiction in a Settling State with respect to a class of Subdivisions and Special Districts in that State that (1) conforms with that Settling State's statutes, case law, and/or rules of procedure regarding class actions; (2) is approved and entered as an order of a court of competent jurisdiction in that State and has become final as defined in "State -Specific Finality"; (3) is binding on all Non -Participating Subdivisions and Non -Participating Special Districts in that State (other than opt outs as permitted under the next sentence); (4) provides that all such Non - Participating Subdivisions or Non -Participating Special Districts may not bring Released Claims against Released Entities, whether on the ground of the Agreement (or the releases herein) or otherwise; and (5) does not impose any costs or obligations on Allergan other than those provided for in the Agreement, or contain any provision inconsistent with any provision of the Agreement. If applicable state law requires that opt -out rights be afforded to members of the class, a class action resolution otherwise meeting the foregoing requirements shall qualify as a Settlement Class Resolution unless Subdivisions collectively representing more than 1 % of the total population of all of that State's Subdivisions listed in Exhibit G opt out. In seeking certification of any Settlement Class, the applicable State and Participating Subdivisions shall make clear that certification is sought solely for settlement purposes and shall have no applicability beyond approval of the settlement for which certification is sought. Nothing in this Agreement constitutes an admission by any Party that class certification would be appropriate for litigation purposes in any case.
80. "Settlement Fund" means the interest -bearing fund established under the Agreement into which Annual Payments by Allergan are made pursuant to subsection VII. The Settlement Fund comprises the Abatement Accounts Fund, State Fund, and Subdivision Fund.
81. "Settlement Fund Administrator" means the entity that determines the Annual Payments (including calculating Incentive Payments pursuant to Section VII and any amounts subject to offset pursuant to Sections VILC and XI), and administers and distributes amounts into the Settlement Fund. It shall also administer and distribute the Additional Restitution Amount pursuant to Section XIL The duties of the Settlement Fund Administrator shall be governed by this Agreement. Prior to 14 December 20, 2022
the Initial Participation Date, the Parties shall agree to selection and removal processes for and a detailed description of the Settlement Fund Administrator's duties all of which shall be appended to the Agreement as Exhibit L.
82. "Settlement Fund Administrator Costs" means any costs and fees associated with or arising out of the duties of the Settlement Fund Administrator with regard to Teva and Allergan's payments to the Settlement Fund as described in Exhibit L and elsewhere in this Agreement, including those arising from the use of a bank or other financial institution to receive and disburse payments.
83. "Settlement Fund Escrow" means the interest -bearing escrow fund established pursuant to this Agreement to hold disputed payments made under this Agreement.
84. "Settlement Participation Form" means the form attached as Exhibit K that Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts must execute and provide to Allergan and the Implementation Administrator or Settlement Fund Administrator, and which shall (1) make such Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts signatories to this Agreement, (2) include a full and complete release of any and all of such Participating Subdivisions' and Participating Special Districts' Claims and (3) require prompt cessation of litigation activity as set forth in Section III, and request for dismissal with prejudice of any Released Claims that have been filed against Released Entities by any such Participating Subdivisions or Participating Special Districts within fourteen (14) business days after the Reference Date.
85. "Settlement Payment Schedule" means the schedule of payments attached to this Agreement as Exhibit M. Actual payment amounts are subject to adjustments consistent with this Agreement.
86. "Settling State" means any Eligible State that has entered into this Agreement.
87. "Special District" means (1) formal and legally recognized sub -entities of a State recognized by the U.S. Census Bureaul and those listed on Exhibit C; and (2) any person, official, or entity thereof acting in an official capacity on behalf of the Special District. Special Districts do not include sub -entities of a State that provide general governance for a defined area that would qualify as a Subdivision. Entities that include any of the following words or phrases in its name shall not be considered a Special District: mosquito, pest, insect, spray, vector, animal, air quality, air pollution, clean air, coastal water, tuberculosis, and sanitary.
88. "State" means any state of the United States of America, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S.
Virgin Islands. Additionally, the use of non -capitalized "state" to describe ' All such entities are found on the "Special District," "School District," and "DEP School District" tabs of the Census Bureau's 2017.Government Units Listing spreadsheet available at https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/gus/datasets/2017/govt_units 2017.ZIP. 15 December 20, 2022
something (e.g., "state court") shall also be read to include parallel entities in commonwealths, territories, and the District of Columbia (e.g., "territorial court").
89. "State Allocation Percentage" means the allocation percentages for Eligible States as set forth in Exhibit F-2, which have been adjusted from the State Global Allocation Percentages to account for the Prior Settlements Credit.
90. "State Cost Fund" means the fund totaling $3,598,373.50 and described in Exhibit T.
91. "State Global Allocation Percentage" means the allocation percentages for all States as set forth in Exhibit F-1, which represents allocations before the Prior Settlements Credit is applied.
92. "State Fund" means a component of the Settlement Fund described in subsection VIII.D.
93. "State Outside Counsel Fee Fund" means the fund totaling $16,192,680.76 described in Exhibit S.
94. "State -Specific Finality" means, with respect to the Settling State in question:
a. the Agreement and the Consent Judgment have been approved and entered by the Court as to Allergan, including the release of all Released Claims against Released Entities as provided in this Agreement; b. for all lawsuits brought by the Settling State against Released Entities for Released Claims, either previously filed or filed as part of the entry of the Consent Judgment, the Court has stated in the Consent Judgment or otherwise entered an order finding that all Released Claims against Released Entities asserted in the lawsuit have been resolved by agreement; and
C. (1) the time for appeal or to seek review of or permission to appeal from the approval and entry as described in subsection (a) hereof and entry of such order described in subsection (b) hereof has expired; or (2) in the event of an appeal, the appeal has been dismissed or denied, or the approval and entry described in (a) hereof and the order described in subsection (b) hereof have been affirmed in all material respects (to the extent challenged in the appeal) by the court of last resort to which such appeal has been taken and such dismissal or affirmance has become no longer subject to further appeal (including, without limitation, review by the United States Supreme Court).
95. "State -Subdivision Agreement" means an agreement that a Settling State reaches with the Subdivisions in that State regarding the allocation, distribution, and/or use of funds allocated to that State and to Exhibit G Participants in that State. A State - Subdivision Agreement shall be effective if approved pursuant to the provisions of Exhibit O or if adopted by statute. Preexisting agreements addressing funds other 16 December 20, 2022
than those allocated pursuant to this Agreement shall qualify if the approval requirements of Exhibit O are met. A State and its Subdivisions may revise, supplement, or refine a State -Subdivision Agreement if approved pursuant to the provisions of Exhibit O or if adopted by statute.
96. "Statewide Payment Amount" means the amount from an Annual Payment to be paid to a Settling State, its separate types of funds (if applicable), and its Exhibit G Participants.
97. "Statutory Trust" means a trust fund established by state law to receive funds allocated to a State's Abatement Accounts Fund and restrict their expenditure to Opioid Remediation purposes subject to reasonable administrative expenses. A State may give a Statutory Trust authority to allocate one or more of the three Settlement Funds, but this is not required.
98. "Subdivision" means (1) a formal and legally recognized sub -entity of a State that provide general governance for a defined area, such as a municipality, county, parish, city, town, incorporated township, village, borough, or any other entities that provide municipal -type government within a State, and (2) any person, official, or entity thereof acting in an official capacity on behalf of the Subdivision (including, without limitation, district attorneys, county attorneys, city attorneys, Sheriffs, and any other official, employee, or representative). Unless otherwise specified, "Subdivision" includes all functional counties and parishes and other functional levels of sub -entities of a State that provide general governance for a defined area. Historic, non-functioning sub -entities of a State (such as Connecticut counties) are not Subdivisions, unless the entity has filed a lawsuit that includes a Released Claim against a Released Entity in a direct, parens patriae, or any other capacity. For purposes of this Agreement, the term Subdivision does not include Special Districts.
99. "Subdivision and Special District Allocation Percentage" means for Subdivisions and Special Districts in a Settling State that are eligible to receive an allocation from the Subdivision Fund pursuant to subsection VIII.D or subsection VIII.E, the percentage as set forth in Exhibit G. The aggregate Subdivision and Special District Allocation Percentage of all Subdivisions and Special Districts receiving a Subdivision and Special District Allocation Percentage in each State shall equal 100%. Immediately upon the effectiveness of any State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, Statutory Trust, or voluntary redistribution allowed by subsection VIII.E.3 (or upon the effectiveness of an amendment to any State - Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, Statutory Trust, or voluntary redistribution allowed by subsection VIILE.3) that addresses allocation from the Subdivision Fund, whether before or after the Initial Participation Date, Exhibit G will automatically be amended to reflect the allocation from the Subdivision Fund pursuant to the State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, Statutory Trust, or voluntary redistribution allowed by Section VIII.E.3. The Subdivision and Special District Allocation Percentages contained in Exhibit G may not change once notice is distributed pursuant to subsection X.A, except upon the effectiveness 17 December 20, 2022
of any State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, Statutory Trust, or voluntary redistribution allowed by subsection VIII.E.3 (or upon the effectiveness of an amendment to any State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, Statutory Trust, or voluntary redistribution allowed by subsection VIII.E.3) that addresses allocation from the Subdivision Fund. For the avoidance of doubt, no Subdivision or Special District not listed on Exhibit G shall receive an allocation from the Subdivision Fund and no provision of this Agreement shall be interpreted to create such an entitlement.
100. "Subdivision Fund" means a component of the Settlement Fund described in subsection VIII.A.
101. "Teva" means (1) Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and, (ii) all of its respective past and present direct or indirect parents, subsidiaries, divisions, affiliates, joint ventures, predecessors, successors, assigns, including but not limited to the Divested Actavis Generic Entities and Anda Inc.
102. "Teva Global Opioid Settlement Agreement" means the settlement agreement between and among the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, Participating Special Districts, and Teva to resolve opioid-related Claims against Teva and the other Released Entities (as defined therein).
103. "Threshold Motion" means a motion to dismiss or equivalent dispositive motion made at the outset of litigation under applicable procedure. A Threshold Motion must include as potential grounds for dismissal, any applicable Bar or the relevant release by a Settling State, Participating Subdivision, or Participating Special District provided under this Agreement and, where appropriate under applicable law, any applicable limitations defense.
11. Participation by States and Condition to Preliminary Agreement A. Notice to States. On November 22, 2022 this Agreement shall be distributed to all Eligible States. The Eligible States' Attorneys General shall then have a period of thirty (30) days to decide whether to become Settling States. Eligible States will decide whether to become Settling States for both this Agreement and the Teva Global Opioid Settlement Agreement, or decline participation in both settlements. However, if Teva enters bankruptcy prior to the Effective Date, Eligible States can choose to only join this Agreement. If a State is only an Eligible State with respect to one of the Agreements, the State need only decide whether to become a Settling State with respect to the Agreement for which it is an Eligible State.
States that determine to become Settling States shall so notify the Enforcement Committee and Allergan within thirty (30) days after November 22, 2022 and shall further commit to obtaining any necessary additional State releases prior to the Effective Date. This notice 18 December 20, 2022
period for States may be extended by written agreement of Allergan and the Enforcement Committee.
B. Ineligible States. Non -Settling States and Prior Settling States shall not be eligible for any payments or have any rights in connection with this Agreement.
C. Condition to Preliminary Agreement. Following the notice period to Eligible States set forth in subsection ILA above, Allergan shall determine on or before the Preliminary Agreement Date whether, in its sole discretion enough States have agreed to become Settling States to proceed with notice to Subdivisions as set forth in Section X below. The determination to proceed shall be in the sole discretion of Allergan and may be based on any criteria or factors deemed relevant by Allergan. If Allergan determines that this condition has been satisfied, and that notice to the Subdivisions should proceed, it will so notify the Settling States by providing notice to the Enforcement Committee on the Preliminary Agreement Date. If Allergan determines that this condition has not been satisfied, it will so notify the Settling States by providing notice to the Enforcement Committee, and this Agreement will have no further effect and all releases and other commitments or obligations contained herein will be void, other than Allergan's funding of Implementation Costs to date. The Preliminary Agreement Date may be extended by written agreement of Allergan and the Enforcement Committee.
D. Later Joinder by States. After the Preliminary Agreement Date, an Eligible State may only become a Settling State with the consent of Allergan, in its sole discretion. If a State becomes a Settling State more than thirty (30) days after the Preliminary Agreement Date, the Subdivisions and Special Districts in that State that become Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts within ninety (90) days of the State becoming a Settling State shall be considered Initial Participating Subdivisions or Initial Participating Special Districts.
M. Cessation of Litigation Activities
A. Following the Preliminary Agreement Date, if Allergan has determined to proceed with notice pursuant to Section II, all Litigating States that intend to become Settling States and that are engaged in or have engaged in discovery and/or substantive motion practice ("Active Litigation") against a Released Entity shall make reasonable efforts to immediately cease litigation activity (e.g., written and document discovery, depositions, expert disclosures, and motion practice) against Allergan where feasible, or to minimize litigation activity by means of agreed deadline extensions and agreed postponement of depositions, document productions, and motion practice. Allergan shall cooperate in such efforts. The obligations under this subsection do not extend past the Reference Date if Allergan determines it is not going forward with the Agreement. This paragraph III.A does not apply to Litigating States with a trial date within six (6) months of the Preliminary Agreement Date, though such Litigating States and Allergan shall engage in good faith discussions regarding the potential cessation of litigation activity.
B. Following the execution of the Settlement Participation Form, attached as Exhibit K, a Litigating Subdivision or Litigating Special District that is engaged in active litigation 19 December 20, 2022
against a Released Entity shall make all reasonable efforts to immediately cease all litigation activity (e.g., written and document discovery, depositions, expert disclosures, and motion practice) against Allergan, where feasible, or to minimize litigation activity by means of agreed deadline extensions and agreed postponement of litigation activity by means of agreed deadline extensions and agreed postponement of depositions, document productions, and motion practices. Allergan shall cooperate in such efforts. The obligations under this subsection do not extend past the Reference Date if Allergan determines it is not going forward with the settlement. This paragraph 111.13 does not apply to Litigating Subdivisions or Litigating Special Districts with a trial date within six (6) months of the Preliminary Agreement Date, though such Litigating Subdivisions or Litigating Special Districts and Allergan shall engage in good faith discussions regarding the potential cessation of litigation activity. Notwithstanding this provision no Litigating Subdivision is required to cease its litigation if it determines such action would be detrimental to its litigation.
C. Following the Reference Date, the Settling States shall endeavor to file Consent Judgments (the contents of which must be agreed upon with Allergan) within thirty (30) days of the Reference Date. Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts, as applicable, shall request dismissal of their actions with prejudice within fourteen (14) days of the Reference Date. The Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts shall use best efforts to get Consent Judgments or orders of dismissal with prejudice, as applicable, entered promptly after filing.
IV. Iniunctive Relief
A. Entry of Injunctive Relief. As part of the Consent Judgment, the Parties agree to the Injunctive Relief Terms attached as Exhibit P.
V. Release
A. Scope. As of the Effective Date, the Released Entities will be released and forever discharged from all of the Releasors' Released Claims. Each Settling State (for itself and its Releasors) and Participating Subdivision (for itself and its Releasors), and Participating Special District (for itself and its Releasors) will, on or before the Effective Date, absolutely, unconditionally, and irrevocably covenant not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist in bringing, or permit to be brought, filed, or claimed, or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released Claims against any Released Entity in any forum whatsoever. The releases provided for in the Agreement are intended to be broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Released Entities the broadest possible bar against any liability relating in any way to Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the power of each Settling State, its Attorney General, each Participating Subdivision, and each Participating Special District to release Claims. The release shall be a complete bar to any Released Claim of all Releasors. Nothing in this Agreement shall release or impair any Claims against Teva Ltd., Teva USA, Cephalon, or Anda, except to the extent expressly set forth in this Agreement.
20 December 20, 2022
B. Claim Over and Non -Party Settlement.
Statement oflntent. It is the intent of the Parties that:
a. Released Entities should not seek contribution or indemnification (other than pursuant to an insurance contract) from other parties for their payment obligations under this Agreement;
b. the payments made under this Agreement shall be the sole payments made by the Released Entities to the Releasors involving, arising out of, or related to Covered Conduct (or conduct that would be Covered Conduct if engaged in by a Released Entity);
Claims by Releasors against non -Parties should not result in additional payments by Released Entities, whether through contribution, indemnification or any other means; and
d. the Settlement meets the requirements of the Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act and any similar state law or doctrine that reduces or discharges a released party's liability to any other parties.
The provisions of this subsection V.B are intended to be implemented consistent with these principles. This Agreement and the releases and dismissals provided for herein are made in good faith.
ContributionAndemnity Prohibited. No Released Entity shall seek to recover for amounts paid under this Agreement based on indemnification, contribution, or any other theory from a manufacturer, pharmacy, hospital, pharmacy benefit manager, health insurer, third -party vendor, trade association, distributor, or health care practitioner, provided that a Released Entity shall be relieved of this prohibition with respect to any entity that asserts a Claim Over against it. However, and notwithstanding the foregoing, this provision shall not preclude any Released Entity from seeking indemnification, contribution, or any other theory from and against Teva Ltd., Divested Entities, Pfizer Inc., King Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Alpharma Inc., and/or each of their respective past and current parents, subsidiaries, and/or affiliates. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing herein shall prohibit a Released Entity from recovering amounts owed pursuant to insurance contracts.
Non -Party Settlement. To the extent that, on or after the Reference Date, any Releasor enters into a Non -Parry Settlement, including in any bankruptcy case or through any plan of reorganization (whether individually or as a class of creditors), the Releasor will include (or in the case of a Non -Party Settlement made in connection with a bankruptcy case, will cause the debtor to include), unless prohibited from doing so under applicable law, in the Non -Parry Settlement a prohibition on contribution or indemnity of any kind substantially equivalent to that required from Allergan in subsection V.13.2, or a release from such Non -Released Entity in favor of the Released Entities (in a form equivalent to the releases 21 December 20, 2022
contained in this Agreement) of any Claim Over. The obligation to obtain the prohibition and/or release required by this subsection is a material term of this Agreement. The sole remedy for a Releasor's failure to include such a provision in a Non -Party Settlement shall be the application of Section V.13.4 below. Non - Released Entities include, but are not limited to, Teva Ltd., Teva USA, Divested Actavis Generic Entities or other Divested Entities, and Anda.
4. Claim Over. In the event that any Releasor obtains a judgment with respect to Non - Party Covered Conduct against a Non -Released Entity that does not contain a prohibition like that in subsection V.13.3, or any Releasor files a Non -Party Covered Conduct Claim against a Non -Released Entity in bankruptcy or a Releasor is prevented for any reason from obtaining a prohibition/release in a Non -Parry Settlement as provided in subsection V.13.3, and such Non -Released Entity asserts a Claim Over against a Released Entity, then Releasor and Allergan shall take the following actions to ensure that the Released Entities do not pay more with respect to Covered Conduct to Releasors or to Non -Released Entities than the amounts owed under this Agreement by Allergan:
a. Allergan shall notify that Releasor of the Claim Over within sixty (60) days of the assertion of the Claim Over or sixty (60) days of the Effective Date of this Agreement, whichever is later;
b. Allergan and that Releasor shall meet and confer concerning the means to hold Released Entities harmless and ensure that it is not required to pay more with respect to Covered Conduct than the amounts owed by Allergan under this Agreement;
That Releasor and Allergan shall take steps sufficient and permissible under the law of the State of the Releasor to hold Released Entities harmless from the Claim Over and ensure Released Entities are not required to pay more with respect to Covered Conduct than the amounts owed by Allergan under this Agreement. Such steps may include, where permissible:
(i) Filing of motions to dismiss or such other appropriate motion by Allergan or Released Entities, and supported by Releasors, in response to any Claim filed in litigation or arbitration; (ii) Reduction of that Releasor's Claim and any judgment it has obtained or may obtain against such Non -Released Entity by whatever amount or percentage is necessary to extinguish such Claim Over under applicable law, up to the amount that Releasor has obtained, may obtain, or has authority to control from such Non -Released Entity;
(iii) Placement into escrow of funds paid by the Non -Released Entities such that those funds are available to satisfy the Claim Over; 22 December 20, 2022
(iv) Return of monies paid by Allergan to that Releasor under this Agreement to permit satisfaction of a judgment against or settlement with the Non -Released Entity to satisfy the Claim Over; (v) Payment of monies to Allergan by that Releasor to ensure it is held harmless from such Claim Over, up to the amount that Releasor has obtained, may obtain, or has authority to control from such Non - Released Entity;
(vi) Credit to Allergan under this Agreement to reduce the overall amounts to be paid under the Agreement such that it is held harmless from the Claim Over; and
(vii) Such other actions as that Releasor and Allergan may devise to hold Allergan harmless from the Claim Over.
d. The actions of that Releasor and Allergan taken pursuant to paragraph (c) must, in combination, ensure Allergan is not required to pay more with respect to Covered Conduct than the amounts owed by Allergan under this Agreement.
e. In the event of any dispute over the sufficiency of the actions taken pursuant to paragraph (c), that Releasor and Allergan may seek review by the National Arbitration Panel, provided that, if the Parties agree, such dispute may be heard by the state court where the relevant Consent Judgment was filed. The National Arbitration Panel shall have authority to require Releasors to implement a remedy that includes one or more of the actions specified in paragraph (c) sufficient to hold Released Entities fully harmless. In the event that the panel's actions do not result in Released Entities being held fully harmless, Allergan shall have a Claim for breach of this Agreement by Releasors, with the remedy being payment of sufficient funds to hold Allergan harmless from the Claim Over. For the avoidance of doubt, the prior sentence does not limit or eliminate any other remedy that Allergan may have.
C. To the extent that the Claim Over is based on a contractual indemnity, the obligations under subsection V.13.4 shall extend solely to a Non -Party Covered Conduct Claim against a pharmacy, clinic, hospital or other purchaser or dispenser of Products, a manufacturer that sold or promoted Products, a consultant, and/or a pharmacy benefit manager or other third - party payor. Allergan shall notify the Settling States, to the extent permitted by applicable law, in the event that any of these types of Non -Released Entities asserts a Claim Over arising out of contractual indemnity against it.
D. General Release. In connection with the releases provided for in the Agreement, each Settling State (for itself and its Releasors), Participating Subdivision and Participating Special District expressly waives, releases, and forever discharges any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law of any state or territory of the United States or 23 December 20, 2022
other jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to § 1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads:
General Release; extent. A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.
A Releasor may thereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it knows, believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims, but each Settling State (for itself and its Releasors), Participating Subdivision and Participating Special District hereby expressly waives and fully, finally, and forever settles, releases, and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Released Claims that may exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist, whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and which, if known, would materially affect the Settling States' decision to enter into the Agreement, the Participating Subdivisions' decision to participate in the Agreement, or the Participating Special District's decision to participate in the Agreement.
E. Res Judicata. Nothing in the Agreement shall be deemed to reduce the scope of the res judicata or claim preclusive effect that the settlement memorialized in the Agreement, and/or any Consent Judgment or other judgment entered on the Agreement, gives rise to under applicable law.
F. Representation and Warranty. The signatories hereto on behalf of their respective Settling State, its Participating Subdivisions, and its Participating Special Districts, expressly represent and warrant that they will obtain on or before the Effective Date (or have obtained) the authority to settle and release, to the maximum extent of the State's power, all Released Claims of (1) their respective Settling State; (2) any of the Settling State's past and present executive departments, state agencies, divisions, boards, commissions and instrumentalities with the regulatory authority to enforce state and federal controlled substances acts; (3) any of their respective Settling State's past and present executive departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions and instrumentalities that have the authority to bring Claims related to Covered Conduct seeking money (including abatement and/or remediation) or revocation of a pharmaceutical distribution license; (4) any Participating Subdivisions; and (5) any Participating Special District. For the purposes of clause (3) above, executive departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions, and instrumentalities are those that are under the executive authority or direct control of the State's Governor. Also, for the purposes of clause (3), a release from a State's Governor is sufficient to demonstrate that the appropriate releases have been obtained.
G. Effectiveness. The releases set forth in the Agreement shall not be impacted in any way by any dispute that exists, has existed, or may later exist between or among the Releasors. Nor shall such releases be impacted in any way by any current or future law, regulation, ordinance, or court or agency order limiting, seizing, or controlling the distribution or use 24 December 20, 2022
of the Settlement Fund or any portion thereof, or by the enactment of future laws, or by any seizure of the Settlement Fund or any portion thereof.
H. Cooperation. Releasors (i) will not encourage any person or entity to bring or maintain any Released Claim against any Released Entity and (ii) will reasonably cooperate with and not oppose any effort by a Released Entity to secure the prompt dismissal of any and all Released Claims.
L Non -Released Claims. Notwithstanding the foregoing or anything in the definition of Released Claims, the Agreement does not waive, release or limit any criminal liability, Claims for any outstanding liability under any tax or securities law, Claims against parties who are not Released Entities, Claims by private individuals, Claims for Medicaid rebates, Claims asserted, or that could be asserted, by any State, Subdivision, or Special District related to the causes of action in In re: Generic Pharmaceuticals Pricing Antitrust Litigation, in the United States District court for the District of Pennsylvania, MDL No. 2724, and any related action (such excluded claims include, but are not limited to, all antitrust claims and any claims related to any non-opioid generic drugs), and any claims arising under the Agreement for enforcement of the Agreement.
VI. Monetary Relief Overview and Maximum Payments
A. Excluding Allergan's share of Implementation Costs and costs of the Settlement Fund Administrator, there are three main categories of monetary payments:
I. Annual Payments to the Settlement Fund. These payments are generally addressed in Section VII. The maximum amount Allergan shall pay in Annual Payments to the Settlement Fund is the Net Abatement Amount of $1,799,186,751.00, which reflects the application of the Prior Settlements Credit to the Global Settlement Abatement Amount. Annual Payments will be made over seven (7) years on the Payment Dates. The actual amount paid will depend on, among other things, the level of participation of Eligible States, their Subdivisions, and their Special Districts.
2. Additional Restitution Amount. These payments are generally addressed in Section XII. The maximum amount Allergan shall pay for the Additional Restitution Amount is $16,192,680.76. Payments for the Additional Restitution Amount will be made over four (4) years on the Payment Dates. The actual amount paid will depend on the number of Eligible States listed in Exhibit N that become Settling States.
3. Attorney Fee and Cost Payments. These payments are generally addressed in Section XII and Exhibits M, R, S, and T. They consist of payments for the State Outside Counsel Fee Fund, the State Cost Fund, and the Attorney Fee and Cost Fund. These payments will be made over four (4) on the Payment Dates. The maximum amount Allergan shall pay into these funds is the Global Settlement Attorney Fee Amount of $206,906,476.36.
25 December 20, 2022
B. The aggregate maximum amount Allergan shall pay for these for these payment categories is $2,022,285,908.12 (the "Post -Credit Global Settlement Amount"). This figure does not include costs related to injunctive relief and document disclosure addressed in Exhibit P, Implementation Costs, and Settlement Fund Administrator Costs addressed in this Agreement. AbbVie agrees to satisfy the obligations to make the payments due in this Section VI if for any reason Allergan fails to fulfill its payment obligations under Section VI (the "Payment Obligations").
C. For purposes of this Agreement only, Releasors represent that fifty-six percent (56%) of the Post -Credit Global Settlement Amount payable by Allergan constitutes consideration for the settlement of Claims involving, arising from, or related to generic opioid drugs that are Products distributed and/or sold before August 2, 2016 by Divested Actavis Generic Entities and other Divested Entities and the operation of Divested Actavis Generic Entities and other Divested Entities related to those generic opioid drugs that are Products before August 2, 2016 that the Releasors are asserting or might otherwise assert or could assert that Allergan (or any other Released Entity) is directly or indirectly and/or jointly or severally liable, including but not limited to, based on parent or control liability or a substantially similar theory. Releasors represent that forty-four percent (44%) of the Post - Credit Global Settlement Amount payable by Allergan constitutes consideration for the settlement of Claims involving, arising from, or related to branded opioid drugs that are Products of or attributable to Allergan or any other Released Entity (including but not limited to branded opioid drugs that are Products distributed and/or sold before August 2, 2016 by Divested Actavis Generic Entities and other Divested Entities and the operation of the Divested Actavis Generic Entities and the other Divested Entities related to those branded opioid drugs that are Products before August 2, 2016) that the Releasors are asserting or might otherwise assert or could assert against Allergan or any other Released Entity, of which seventy-seven percent (77%) is specifically involving, arising from, or related to Kadian® (including but not limited to Kadian® manufactured, distributed, marketed, and/or sold from 1997 through 2008 by King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and/or Alpharma Inc.).
D. Settlement Fund Administrator and Implementation Costs. If this Agreement becomes effective, Allergan shall be responsible for one-third of the Implementation Costs. The full amount of the Implementation Costs shall be jointly advanced by Teva and Allergan. If this Agreement becomes effective, then Allergan shall deduct from Allergan's Initial Year Payment the difference between the excess amount it advanced for Implementation Costs and its one-third obligation for such costs. Settlement Fund Administrator Costs shall be paid out of interest accrued on the Settlement Fund. Should such interest prove insufficient to fully cover the costs, the remaining cost amounts shall be paid one-third by Teva, one- third by Allergan and one-third from the Settlement Fund through the disbursement of Allergan's final Payment Allergan shall not be responsible for any costs incurred by the Settlement Fund Administrator after the disbursement of its final Payment.
VII. Annual Payments to Settlement Fund
26 December 20, 2022
A. Structure of Payments to Settlement Fund
All payments under this Section VII shall be made into the Settlement Fund, except that where specified, they shall be made into the Settlement Fund Escrow. The Settlement Fund shall be allocated and used only as specified in Section VIII.
2. Allergan shall pay into the Settlement Fund the Net Abatement Amount consisting of $1,799,186,751.00 minus: (1) any offsets specified in subsection VII.0 below; (2) any unearned Incentive Payments under subsection VILE below; and (3) any adjustments under Section XI below.
3. The payments to the Settlement Fund shall be divided into Base Payments and Incentive Payments as provided in subsections VILD and VILE below and set out in Exhibit M.
B. Settlement Fund Payment Process
Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, Allergan shall make one Initial Year Payment (the first Annual Payment) and six (6) additional Annual Payments of equal installments of the Net Abatement Amount (after all applicable offsets) into the Settlement Fund. The Settlement Payment Schedule is set forth in Exhibit M. Annual Payments shall be made on the Payment Date, provided that the necessary wire instructions, W-9 form, and Allergan's Bank Verification Form process is completed for the Settlement Fund at least twenty-one (21) days before the relevant payment is due and Allergan has completed any process required by the Settlement Fund Administrator and/or its financial institution(s) to complete the transaction. If there is a delay in making a payment because any of these conditions were not completed at least twenty-one (21) days in advance of the Payment Date, then the Annual Payment will be made within twenty-one (21) days of the completion of these conditions.
2. The Initial Year Payment shall consist of only Base Payments (after all applicable offsets). The other six (6) Annual Payments shall each consist of Base Payments (after all applicable offsets) and Incentive Payments (after all applicable offsets).
The amount of the Initial Year Payment and each other Annual Payment, payable by Allergan shall not exceed the maximum amounts allocated to each Payment Year in Exhibit M.
3. To determine each Annual Payment for Payment Year 2 forward, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall use the data in its records sixty (60) days prior to the Payment Date for each payment. Prior to the Effective Date, the Parties will include an exhibit to the Agreement setting forth in detail the process for the Settlement Fund Administrator obtaining relevant data and for distributing funds to Settling States and Exhibit G Participants consistent with the terms of this Agreement as quickly as practical.
27 December 20, 2022
4. The Settlement Fund Administrator shall determine the Annual Payment and the Statewide Payment Amount for each Settling State, consistent with the provisions in Exhibit L, by:
a. determining, for each Settling State, the amount of Base Payments and Incentive Payments to which the State is entitled by applying the criteria in this Section;
b. applying any reductions, or offsets required by Sections VII and XI; and C. determining the total amount owed by Allergan to all Settling States and Exhibit G Participant.
5. If, no later than fifty (50) days prior to the Payment Date for each payment for Payment Year 2 forward, Allergan and the Enforcement Committee inform the Settlement Fund Administrator that they agree on the amount of the Annual Payment and the Statewide Payment Amount for each Settling State, Allergan shall pay the agreed -upon Annual Payment amount on the Payment Date and the Settlement Fund Administrator shall treat those amounts as the determination described in subsection VILBA. If the Settlement Fund Administrator is not so informed, it shall give notice to Allergan, the Settling States, and the Enforcement Committee of the amount of the Annual Payment, and the Statewide Payment Amount for each Settling State, following the determination described in subsection VILBA, and the following timeline shall apply:
a. Within twenty-one (21) days of the notice provided by the Settlement Fund Administrator, Allergan, any Settling State or the Enforcement Committee may dispute, in writing, the calculation of the Annual Payment, or the Statewide Payment Amount for a Settling State. Such disputing party must provide a written notice of dispute to the Settlement Fund Administrator, the Enforcement Committee, any affected Settling State, and Allergan identifying the nature of the dispute, the amount of money that is disputed, and the Settling State(s) affected.
b. Within twenty-one (21) days of the sending of a written notice of dispute, any affected party may submit a response, in writing, to the Settlement Fund Administrator, the Enforcement Committee, any affected Settling State, and Allergan identifying the basis for disagreement with the notice of dispute.
C. If no response is filed, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall adjust the amount calculated consistent with the written notice of dispute, and Allergan shall pay the adjusted amount as the Annual Payment on the Payment Date. If a written response to the written notice of dispute is timely sent to the Settlement Fund Administrator, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall notify Allergan of the preliminary amount to be paid, which shall be the greater of the amount originally calculated by the Settlement Fund Administrator or the amount that would be consistent with 28 December 20, 2022
the notice of dispute, provided, however that in no circumstances shall the preliminary amount to be paid be higher than the maximum amount of Base Payments and Incentive Payments for that payment as set forth in Exhibit M. For the avoidance of doubt, a transfer of payments from the Settlement Fund Escrow for other Payment Years does not count toward determining whether the amount to be paid is higher than the maximum amount of Base Payments and Incentive Payments for that payment as set forth in Exhibit M.
d. The Settlement Fund Administrator shall place any disputed amount of the preliminary amount paid by Allergan into the Settlement Fund Escrow and shall disburse any undisputed amount to each Settling State and its Exhibit G Participants.
6. If a Settling State informs the Settlement Fund Administrator that it and its Exhibit G Participants have reached consensus on the amount of its Statewide Payment Amount, determined pursuant to subsection VII.B.3 or VILB.A, to be distributed to the Settling State, among its separate types of funds (if applicable), and among its Exhibit G Participants, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall disburse the Statewide Payment Amount pursuant to the consensus distribution amounts provided by the Settling State. For a Settling States that does not so notify the Settlement Fund Administrator, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall allocate the Settling State's Statewide Payment Amount, pursuant to Section VII, among the separate types of funds for the Settling State (if applicable), and among its Exhibit G Participants using the following procedures:
a. As soon as possible for each payment and following the determination described in subsection VII.B.3 and VILBA, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall give notice to the relevant Settling States and their Exhibit G Participants of the amount to be received by each Settling State, the amount to be received by the separate types of funds for each Settling State (if applicable), and the amount to be received by each Settling State's Exhibit G Participants.
b. Within twenty-one (21) days of the notice provided by the Settlement Fund Administrator, any Settling State or Exhibit G Participant may dispute, in writing, the calculation of the amount to be received by a Settling State and/or its Exhibit G Participants. A dispute will be deemed invalid and disregarded if it challenges the allocations adopted by a State -Subdivision Agreement approved pursuant to the provisions of Exhibit O or by statute.
Such disputing party must provide a written notice of dispute to the Settlement Fund Administrator, any affected Settling State, and any affected Exhibit G Participant identifying the nature of the dispute, the amount of money that is disputed, and the Settling State(s) affected.
C. Within twenty-one (21) days of the sending of a written notice of dispute, any affected Settling State or any affected Exhibit G Participant may submit 29 December 20, 2022
a response, in writing, to the Settlement Fund Administrator, any affected Settling State and any affected Exhibit G Participant identifying the basis for disagreement with the notice of dispute.
d. If no response is filed, the Settlement Fund Administrator shall adjust the amount calculated consistent with the written notice of dispute.
The Settlement Fund Administrator shall place any disputed amount into the Settlement Fund Escrow and shall disburse any undisputed amount to the Settling State and its Exhibit G Participants.
Disputes described in this subsection (other than those for which no response is filed under subsection VII.B.5.c or VII.B.6.d) shall be resolved in accordance with the terms of Section XIV.
The Settlement Fund Administrator may combine the disbursements of Annual Payments with disbursement of funds under other comparable opioid settlements.
In determining when disbursements for each Annual Payment will be made, the Settlement Fund Administrator may take into account the timeline for the availability of disbursements under other comparable opioid settlements.
For the avoidance of doubt, Subdivisions and Special Districts not listed on Exhibit G shall not receive an allocation from the Subdivision Fund.
C. Offsets to Annual Payments to the Settlement Fund for Non -Settling States An offset equal to the Net Abatement Amount of $1,799,186,751.00 times the State Allocation Percentage assigned to each Non -Settling State in Exhibit F-2 shall be deducted from the total amount to be paid by Allergan to the Settlement Fund.
Non -Settling States shall not be eligible for any payments or have any rights in connection with this Agreement. Accordingly, the stated maximum dollar amounts of the Annual Payments specified in Exhibit M are reduced by the aggregate State Allocation Percentage of Non -Settling States as set forth in Exhibit F-2.
D. Base Payments
Allergan shall make Base Payments into the Settlement Fund in an amount equal to 45% of the Net Abatement Amount of $1,799,1.86,751.00 minus any offsets for Non -Settling States specified in Section VII.C.I. The maximum total for Base Payments is $809,634,037.95. The Base Payments will be paid in accordance with the Settlement Payment Schedule specified by Exhibit M, subject to potential offsets for Non -Settling States as provided in Section VILC.1.
The Base Payments will be allocated by Settling State proportionate to each Settling State's State Allocation Percentage in Exhibit F-2, adjusted for any Non -Settling State.
30 December 20, 2022
E. Incentive Abatement Payments
Allergan shall make potential Incentive Payments totaling up to a maximum of 5 5 % of the Net Abatement Amount of $1,799,186,751.00 for all Settling States with the actual amount depending on whether and the extent to which the criteria set forth below are met in each Settling State. The maximum total for Incentive Payments is $989,552,713.05.
The maximum total Incentive Payment for any Settling State shall be no more than the maximum total for Incentive Payments listed in Section VII.E.1 times the Settling State's State Allocation Percentage specified in Exhibit F-2. Incentive Payments are state -specific, with each Settling State receiving an Incentive Payment based on the incentives for which it is eligible for that year under the criteria set forth below and any offset specified in Section XI.
The Incentive Payments shall be divided among four (4) categories, referred to as Incentives A—D. Incentives A—C will be due in installments over six (6) Payment Years beginning with Annual Payment 2 and Incentive D will be due in installments over four (4) years beginning with Annual Payment 4, as shown on Exhibit M. The total amount of Incentive Payments in an Annual Payment shall be the sum of the Incentive Payments for which individual Settling States are eligible for that Payment Year under the criteria set forth below. The Incentive Payments shall be made with respect to a specific Settling State based on its eligibility for that Payment Year under the criteria set forth below.
4. The maximum amount available for Incentive Payments, $989,552,713.05, is divided into two pools. The maximum amount of Incentive Payments for Incentives A-C shall be $863,609,640.48, which is 48% of the maximum Net Abatement Amount. A Settling State may be eligible for its full allocable share of this payment by either achieving Incentive A or by fully earning both Incentives B and C. The maximum amount of Incentive Payments for Incentive D shall be $125,943,072.57, which is 7% of the maximum Net Abatement Amount. (These figures represent maximum payments prior to being adjusted for any offsets and assumes every State is a Settling State and will satisfy the requirements specified below to earn its maximum incentive amount. The Incentive Payments will be paid in accordance with the payment schedule in Exhibit M, subject to potential deductions as provided herein.) A Settling State qualifies to receive Incentive Payments in addition to Base Payments if it meets the incentive eligibility requirements specified below. Settling States may qualify for Incentive Payments in four ways. If a Settling State qualifies for Incentive A, it will become entitled to receive the maximum payment allocable to the State for Incentives A-C as stated in subsection VII.E.5. If a Settling State does not qualify for Incentive A, it can alternatively qualify for Incentive B and/or Incentive C. A Settling State can qualify for Incentive D regardless of whether it qualifies for another Incentive Payment.
31 December 20, 2022
5. Incentive A: Full Participation or Fully Released Claims of Litigating Subdivisions, Litigating Special Districts, Non -Litigating Subdivisions with Population Greater Than 10, 000, and Non -Litigating Covered Special Districts. a. A Settling State's total potential Incentive A payment allocation is $863,609,640.48 times the percentage allocation assigned that Settling State in Exhibit F-2.
b. A State qualifies for Incentive A by: (1) complete participation in the form of releases consistent with Section V above from all Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts, Non -Litigating Subdivisions with population over 10,000, and Non -Litigating Covered Special Districts; (2) a Bar; or (3) a combination of approaches in clauses (1)-(2) that achieves the same level of resolution of Subdivision and Special District Claims (e.g., a law barring future litigation combined with full joinder by Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts). For purposes of Incentive A, a Subdivision or Special District is considered a "Litigating Subdivision" or "Litigating Special District" if it has brought Released Claims against Released Entities on or before the Reference Date; all other Subdivisions and Special Districts are considered "Non -Litigating." For purposes of Incentive A, Non -Litigating Covered Special Districts shall not include a Special District with any of the following words or phrases in its name:
mosquito, pest, insect, spray, vector, animal, air quality, air pollution, clean air, coastal water, tuberculosis, and sanitary.
C. If a Settling State qualifies for Incentive A after receiving an Incentive Payment under Incentives B or C, described below, the Settling State's payments under Incentive A will equal the remainder of its total potential Incentive A payments less any payments previously received under Incentives B or C. A Settling State that receives all of its total potential Incentive A payment allocation shall not receive additional Incentive Payments under Incentives B or C.
d. A Settling State that is not eligible for Incentive A as of two (2) years after the Effective Date shall not be eligible for Incentive A for that Payment Year or any subsequent Payment Years.
6. Incentive B: Early Participation or Released Claims by Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts.
a. If a Settling State does not qualify for Incentive A, it may still qualify to receive up to 60% of its total potential Incentive A payment allocation under Incentive B.
b. A Settling State can qualify for an Incentive B payment if Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts collectively representing at least 75% of the Settling State's litigating population are either Participating 32 December 20, 2022
Subdivisions, Participating Special Districts, or have their claims resolved through Case -Specific Resolutions.
(i) A Settling State's litigating population is the sum of the population of all Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts. A Settling State's litigating population shall include all Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts whose populations overlap in whole or in part with other Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts, for instance in the case of a Litigating Special District, city, or township contained within a county. (ii) For example, if School District A is a Litigating Special District in City B with a population of 1, City B is itself a Litigating Subdivision with a population of 8, and City B is located within County C, and County C is a Litigating Subdivision with a population 10, then each of their individual populations shall be added together (i.e., 1 + 8 +10) to determine the total litigating population (i.e., 19).
C. The following time periods apply to Incentive B payments:
(1) Period 1: Zero to two hundred ten (210) days after the Effective Date.
(ii) Period 2: Two hundred eleven (211) days to one year after the Effective Date.
(iii) Period 3: One year and one day to two years after the Effective Date. d. Within Period 1: If Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts collectively representing at least 75% of a Settling State's litigating population are Participating Subdivisions or Participating Special Districts, or have their Claims resolved through Case -Specific Resolutions during Period 1, then a sliding scale will determine the share of the funds available under Incentive B, with a maximum of 60% of the Settling State's total potential Incentive Payment allocation available. Under that sliding scale, if Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts collectively representing 75% of a Settling State's litigating population become Participating Subdivisions or Participating Special Districts, or achieve Case -Specific Resolution status by the end of Period 1, a Settling State will receive 50% of the total amount available to it under Incentive B. If more Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special. Districts become Participating Subdivisions or Participating Special Districts, or achieve Case -Specific Resolution status, the Settling State shall receive an increased percentage of the total amount available to it under Incentive B as shown in the table below.
33 December 20, 2022
Participation or Case -Specific
Resolution Levels
(As percentage of litigating
population)
Incentive B Award
(As percentage of total
amount available to Settling State
for Incentive B)
75%
50%
76%
52%
77%
54%
78%
56%
79%
58%
80%
60%
85%
70%
90%
80%
95%
90%
100%
100%
Within Period 2: If a Settling State did not qualify for an Incentive B payment in Period 1 but Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts collectively representing at least 75% of the Settling State's litigating population become Participating Subdivisions or Participating Special Districts, or achieve Case -Specific Resolution status by the end of Period 2, then the Settling State qualifies for 75% of the Incentive B payment it would have qualified for in Period 1.
f. Within Period 3: If a Settling State did not qualify for an Incentive B payment in Periods 1 or 2, but Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special Districts collectively representing at least 75% of the Settling State's litigating population become Participating Subdivisions or Participating Special Districts, or achieve Case -Specific Resolution status by the end of Period 3, then the Settling State qualifies for 50% of the Incentive B payment it would have qualified for in Period 1. g. A Settling State that receives the Incentive B payment for Periods 1 and/or 2 can receive additional payments if it secures participation from additional Litigating Subdivisions and/or Litigating Special Districts (or Case -Specific Resolutions of their Claims) during Periods 2 and/or 3. Those additional payments would equal 75% (for additional participation or Case -Specific Resolutions during Period 2) and 50% (for additional participation or Case - Specific Resolutions during Period 3) of the amount by which the increased litigating population levels would have increased the Settling State's Incentive B payment if they had been achieved in Period 1. h. The percentage of the available Incentive B amount for which a Settling State is eligible by the end of Period 3 shall cap its eligibility for that Payment Year and all subsequent Payment Years. If Litigating Subdivisions and Litigating Special. Districts that have become Participating Subdivisions or Participating Special Districts, or achieved Case -Specific Resolution 34 December 20, 2022
status collectively represent less than 75% of a Settling State's litigating population by the end of Period 3, the Settling State shall not receive any Incentive B payment.
If there are no Litigating Subdivisions or Litigating Special Districts in a Settling State, and that Settling State is otherwise eligible for Incentive B, that Settling State will receive its full allocable share of Incentive B.
Incentives earned under Incentive B shall accrue after each of Periods 1, 2, and 3. Calculations to increase Incentive Payments in later periods based on additional joinder shall not reduce any amount already vested at the end of a prior period.
Incentive C: Participation or Release of Claims by Primary Subdivisions a. If a Settling State does not qualify for Incentive A, it may still qualify to receive up to 40% of its total potential Incentive A payment allocation under Incentive C, which has two parts.
b. Part 1: Under Incentive C, Part 1, a Settling State can receive up to 75% of its Incentive C allocation. A Settling State can qualify for a payment under Incentive C, Part 1 only if Primary Subdivisions (whether Litigating Primary Subdivisions or Non -Litigating Primary Subdivisions as of the Reference Date) collectively representing at least 60% of the Settling State's Primary Subdivision population become Participating Subdivisions or achieve Case -Specific Resolution status.
(i) A Settling State's Primary Subdivision population is the sum of the population of all Primary Subdivisions (whether Litigating Primary Subdivisions or Non -Litigating Primary Subdivisions as of the Reference Date). A Settling State's Primary Subdivision population shall include all Primary Subdivisions whose populations overlap in whole or in part with other Primary Subdivisions, for instance in the case of a Primary Subdivision that is a city contained within a Primary Subdivision that is a county. Because Primary Subdivisions include Subdivisions whose populations overlap in whole or in part with other Subdivisions, the Settling State's Primary Subdivision population may be greater than the Settling State's total population. (Special Districts are not relevant for purposes of Incentive C calculations.)
(ii) For example, if City A is a Primary Subdivision with a population of 1 within County B, and County B is a Primary Subdivision with a population of 10, then each of their individual populations shall be added together (i.e., 1+10) to determine the total Primary Subdivision population (i.e., 11).
35 December 20, 2022
C. A sliding scale will determine the share of the funds available under Incentive C, Part 1 to Settling States meeting the minimum 60% threshold.
Under that sliding scale, if a Settling State secures participation or Case - Specific Resolutions from Primary Subdivisions representing 60% of its total Primary Subdivision population, it will receive 40% of the total amount potentially available to it under Incentive C, Part 1. If a Settling State secures participation or Case -Specific Resolutions from Primary Subdivisions representing more than 60% of its Primary Subdivision population, the Settling State shall be entitled to receive a higher percentage of the total amount potentially available to it under Incentive C, Part 1, on the scale shown in the table below. If there are no Primary Subdivisions, and that Settling State is otherwise eligible for Incentive C, that Settling State will receive its full allocable share of Incentive C, Part 1.
Participation or Case -Specific
Resolution Levels
(As percentage of total Primary
Subdivision population)
Incentive C, Part I Award
(As percentage of total
amount available to Settling State
for Incentive C, Part 1)
60%
40%
70%
45%
80%
50%
85%
55%
90%
60%
91%
65%
92%
70%
93%
80%
94%
90%
95%
100%
d. Part 2: If a Settling State qualifies to receive an incentive under Incentive C, Part 1, the Settling State can also qualify to receive an additional incentive amount equal to 25% of its total potential Incentive C allocation by securing 100% participation of the ten (10) largest Subdivisions by population in the Settling State. (Special Districts are not relevant for purposes of this calculation.) If a Settling State does not qualify for any amount under Incentive C, Part 1, it cannot qualify for Incentive C, Part 2. e. Incentives earned under Incentive C shall accrue on an annual basis up to three years after the Effective Date. At one, two, and three years after the Effective Date, the Settlement Fund Administrator will conduct a lookback to assess which Subdivisions had agreed to participate or had their Claim resolved through a Case -Specific Resolution that year. Based on the look - back, the Settlement Fund Administrator will calculate the incentives accrued under Incentive C for the year. The percentage of the available Incentive C amount, for both Part 1 and Part 2, for which a Settling State is 36 December 20, 2022
eligible three years after the Effective Date shall cap its eligibility for that Payment Year and all subsequent Payment Years.
8. Incentive D: No Qualifying Lawsuits Surviving Threshold Motions at Two Look - Back Dates.
a. A Settling State's total potential Incentive D payment allocation is $125,943,072.57 times the percentage allocation assigned that Settling State in Exhibit F-2.
b. If, at any time within five and one-half (5.5) years of the Preliminary Agreement Date, any Subdivision or Special District within a Settling State files litigation pursuing Released Claims against any Released Entity (a "Qualifying Lawsuit"), then Allergan shall, within thirty (30) days of Allergan or any Released Entity being served or otherwise informed of the prosecution of such Released Claims, provide notice to the Settling State in which such Released Claims are being pursued and shall give the relevant Settling State a reasonable opportunity to extinguish the Released Claims without any payment or any other obligations being imposed upon any Released Entities (apart from the Global Settlement Amount payable by Allergan under the Agreement or the Injunctive Relief Terms incurred by it). The relevant Settling State and Allergan shall confer and use reasonable efforts to promptly resolve a Qualifying Lawsuit so that it is dismissed with prejudice. Nothing in this subsection creates an obligation for a Settling State to make a monetary payment or incur any other obligation to an entity filing a Qualifying Lawsuit.
C. Part 1: Under Incentive D, Part 1, a Settling State shall receive 50% of its total potential Incentive D payment allocation if, at two years after the Effective Date (the "First Look -Back Date"), there are no pending Released Claims from a Qualifying Lawsuit that survived a Threshold Motion within the Settling State against any Released Entities.
d. Part 2: Under Incentive D, Part 2, a Settling State shall receive 50% of its total potential Incentive D payment allocation if, at five and one-half (5.5) years after the Preliminary Agreement Date (the "Second Look -Back Date"), there are no pending Released Claims from a Qualifying Lawsuit that survived a Threshold Motion within the Settling State against any Released Entities.
e. After the First Look -Back Date, a Settling State can become re -eligible for Incentive Payment D Part 1 if the lawsuit that survived a Threshold Motion is dismissed pursuant to a later motion on grounds included in the Threshold Motion, in which case the Settling State shall become eligible for Incentive Payment D less any litigation fees and cost incurred by the Released Entity in the interim, except that if the dismissal motion occurs after the 37 December 20, 2022
completion of opening statements in such action, the Settling State shall not be eligible for Incentive Payment D.
VIII. Allocation and Use of Settlement Funds
A. Components of Settlement Fund. The Settlement Fund shall be comprised of an Abatement Accounts Fund, a State Fund, and a Subdivision Fund for each Settling State. The payments under Section VI into the Settlement Fund shall be initially allocated among those three (3) sub -funds and distributed and used as provided below or as provided for by a State - Subdivision Agreement (or other State -specific allocation of funds). Unless otherwise specified herein, payments placed into the Settlement Fund do not revert back to Allergan.
B. Use of Settlement Payments. It is the intent of the Parties that the payments disbursed from the Settlement Fund to Settling States and Exhibit G Participants be for Opioid Remediation, subject to limited exceptions that must be documented in accordance with subsection VII.C. In no event may less than 85% of Allergan's payments pursuant to Section VI.A.1-3 over the entirety of all Payment Years (but not any single Payment Year) be spent on Opioid Remediation.
C. While disfavored by the Parties, a Settling State or Exhibit G Participant may use monies from the Settlement Fund (that have not been restricted by this Agreement solely to future Opioid Remediation) for purposes that do not qualify as Opioid Remediation. If, at any time, a Settling State or Exhibit G Participant uses any monies from the Settlement Fund for a purpose that does not qualify as Opioid Remediation, such Settling State or Exhibit G Participant shall identify such amounts and report to the Settlement Fund Administrator and Allergan how such funds were used, including if used to pay attorneys' fees, investigation costs, litigation costs, or costs related to the operation and enforcement of this Agreement, respectively. It is the intent of the Parties that the reporting under this subsection VIII.0 shall be available to the public. For the avoidance of doubt, (a) any amounts not identified under this subsection VIII.0 as used to pay attorneys' fees, investigation costs, or litigation costs shall be included in the "Compensatory Restitution Amount" for purposes of subsection VIII.G and (b) Participating Subdivisions not listed on Exhibit G or Participating Special Districts that receive monies from the Settlement Fund indirectly may only use such monies from the Settlement Fund for purposes that qualify as Opioid Remediation.
D. Allocation of Settlement Fund. The allocation of the Settlement Fund allows for different approaches to be taken in different states, such as through a State -Subdivision Agreement.
Given the uniqueness of States and their Subdivisions, Settling States and Participating Subdivisions are encouraged to enter into State -Subdivision Agreements in order to direct the allocation of their portion of the Settlement Fund. As set out below, the Settlement Fund Administrator will make an initial allocation to three (3) state -level sub -funds. The Settlement Fund Administrator will then, for each Settling State and its Exhibit G Participants, apply the terms of this Agreement and any relevant State -Subdivision Agreement, Statutory Trust, Allocation Statute, or voluntary redistribution of funds as set out below before disbursing the funds.
38 December 20, 2022
Base Pa_ 1�. The Settlement Fund Administrator will allocate Base Payments under subsection VILD among the Settling States in proportion to their respective State Allocation Percentages. Base Payments for each Settling State will then be allocated 15% to its State Fund, 70% to its Abatement Accounts Fund, and 15% to its Subdivision Fund. Amounts may be reallocated and will be distributed as provided in subsection VIII.E.
2. Incentive Pam. The Settlement Fund Administrator will treat Incentive Payments under subsection VILE on a State -specific basis. Incentive payments for which a Settling State is eligible under subsection VILE will be allocated 15% to its State Fund, 70% to its Abatement Accounts Fund, and 15% to its Subdivision Fund. Amounts may be reallocated and will be distributed as provided in subsection VIII.E.
3. Application of Adjustments. If any offset under Section XI applies with respect to a Settling State, the offset shall be applied proportionally to all amounts that would otherwise be apportioned and distributed to the State Fund, the Abatement Accounts Fund, and the Subdivision Fund for that State.
4. Settlement Fund Administrator. Prior to the Initial Participation Date, Allergan and the Enforcement Committee will agree to a detailed mechanism consistent with the foregoing for the Settlement Fund Administrator to follow in allocating, apportioning, and distributing payments, which shall be appended hereto as Exhibit L.
E. Settlement Fund Reallocation and Distribution. As set forth below, within a particular Settling State's account, amounts contained in the Settlement Fund sub -funds may be reallocated and distributed per a State -Subdivision Agreement or other means. If the apportionment of amounts is not addressed and controlled under subsections VIII.E.1-2, then the default provisions of subsection VIII.E.4 apply. It is not necessary that a State - Subdivision Agreement or other means of allocating funds pursuant to subsections VIILE.1-2 address all of the Settlement Fund sub -funds. For example, a Statutory Trust might only address disbursements from a Settling State's Abatement Accounts Fund.
Distribution by State -Subdivision Agreement. If a Settling State has a State - Subdivision Agreement, amounts apportioned to that State's State Fund, Abatement Accounts Fund, and Subdivision Fund under subsection VIILD shall be reallocated and distributed as provided by that agreement. Any State -Subdivision Agreement entered into or amended after July 26, 2022 shall be applied only if it requires: (1) that all amounts be used for Opioid Remediation except as allowed by subsection VIII.C, and (2) that at least 70% of amounts be used solely for future Opioid Remediation (references to "future Opioid Remediation" include amounts paid to satisfy any future demand by another governmental entity to make a required reimbursement in connection with the past care and treatment of a person related to the Alleged Harms). For a State -Subdivision Agreement to be applied to the relevant portion of an Annual Payment, notice must be provided to Allergan 39 December 20, 2022
and the Settlement Fund Administrator at least sixty (60) days prior to the Payment Date.
2. Distribution by Allocation Statute. If a Settling State has an Allocation Statute and/or a Statutory Trust that addresses allocation or distribution of amounts apportioned to such State's State Fund, Abatement Accounts Fund, and/or Subdivision Fund and that, to the extent any or all such sub -funds are addressed, requires (1) all amounts to be used for Opioid Remediation except as allowed by subsection VIII.C, and (2) at least 70% of all amounts to be used solely for future Opioid Remediation, then, to the extent allocation or distribution is addressed, the amounts apportioned to that State's State Fund, Abatement Accounts Fund, and Subdivision Fund under subsection VIII.D shall be allocated and distributed as addressed and provided by the applicable Allocation Statute or Statutory Trust. For the avoidance of doubt, an Allocation Statute or Statutory Trust need not address all three (3) sub -funds that comprise the Settlement Fund, and if the applicable Allocation Statute or Statutory Trust does not address distribution of all or some of these three (3) sub -funds, the applicable Allocation Statute or Statutory Trust does not replace the default provisions in subsection VIII.E.4 of any such unaddressed fund. For example, if an Allocation Statute or Statutory Trust that meets the requirements of this subsection VIII.E only addresses funds restricted to abatement, then the default provisions in this Agreement concerning allocation among the three (3) sub -funds comprising the Settlement Fund and the distribution of the State Fund and Subdivision Fund for that State would still apply, while the distribution of the applicable State's Abatement Accounts Fund would be governed by the qualifying Allocation Statute or Statutory Trust.
3. Voluntary Redistribution. A Settling State may choose to reallocate all or a portion. of its State Fund to its Abatement Accounts Fund. An Exhibit G Participant may choose to reallocate all or a portion of its allocation from the Subdivision Fund to the State's Abatement Accounts Fund or to another Participating Subdivision or Participating Special District. The Settlement Fund Administrator is not required to honor voluntary redistribution for which notice is provided to it less than sixty (60) days prior to the Payment Date.
4. Distribution in the Absence of a State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, or Statutory Trust. If subsections VIII.E.1-2 do not apply, and subject to any voluntary redistribution pursuant to subsection VIII.E.3, amounts apportioned to that State's State Fund, Abatement Accounts Fund, and Subdivision Fund under subsection VIILD shall be distributed as follows:
a. Amounts apportioned to that State's State Fund shall be distributed to that State.
b. Amounts apportioned to that State's Abatement Accounts Fund shall be distributed consistent with subsection VIII.F. Each Settling State shall submit to the Settlement Fund Administrator a designation of a lead state agency or other entity to serve as the single point of contact for that Settling 40 December 20, 2022
State's funding requests from the Abatement Accounts Fund and other communications with the Settlement Fund Administrator. The designation of an individual entity is for administrative purposes only and such designation shall not limit funding to such entity or even require that such entity receive funds from this Agreement. The designated entity shall be the only entity authorized to request funds from the Settlement Fund Administrator to be disbursed from that Settling State's Abatement Accounts Fund. If a Settling State has established a Statutory Trust then that Settling State's single point of contact may direct the Settlement Fund Administrator to release the State's Abatement Accounts Fund to the Statutory Trust.
C. Amounts apportioned to that State's Subdivision Fund shall be distributed to Participating Subdivisions in that State listed on Exhibit G per the Subdivision Allocation Percentage listed in Exhibit G. Subsection X.I shall govern amounts that would otherwise be distributed to Non -Participating Subdivisions listed in Exhibit G.
d. Special Districts shall not be allocated funds from the Subdivision Fund, except through a voluntary redistribution allowed by subsection VIII.E.3. A Settling State may allocate funds from its State Fund or Abatement Accounts Fund for Special Districts.
5. Restrictions on Distribution. No amounts may be distributed from the Subdivision Fund contrary to Section IX, i.e., no amounts may be distributed directly to Non - Participating Subdivisions or to Later Participating Subdivisions in excess of what is permissible under subsection IX.E. Amounts allocated to the Subdivision Fund that cannot be distributed by virtue of the preceding sentence shall be distributed into the sub -account in the Abatement Accounts Fund for the Settling State in which the Subdivision is located, unless those payments are redirected elsewhere by a State -Subdivision Agreement described in subsection VIILE.1 or by an Allocation Statute or a Statutory Trust described in subsection VIII.E.2.
F. Provisions Regarding Abatement Accounts Fund.
State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, and Statutory Trust Fund Provisions. A State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, or Statutory Trust may govern the operation and use of amounts in that State's Abatement Accounts Fund so long as it complies with the requirements of subsection VIII.E. I or VIII.E.2 as applicable, and all direct payments to Subdivisions comply with subsections IX.E-H.
2. Absence of a State -Subdivision Agreement_ Allocation Statute. or Statutory Trust.
In the absence of a State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, or Statutory Trust that addresses distribution, the Abatement Accounts Fund will be used solely for future Opioid Remediation and the following shall apply with respect to a Settling State:
41 December 20, 2022
a.
Regional Remediation.
(i) At least 50% of distributions for remediation from a State's Abatement Accounts Fund shall be annually allocated and tracked to the regional level. A Settling State may allow the Advisory Committee established pursuant to subsection VIII.F.2.d to define its regions and assign regional allocations percentages. Otherwise, a Settling State shall (1) define its initial regions, which shall consist of one (1) or more Subdivisions and which shall be designated by the State agency with primary responsibility for substance abuse disorder services employing, to the maximum extent practical, existing regions established in that State for opioid abuse treatment or other public health purposes; and (2) assign initial regional allocation percentages to the regions based on the Subdivision Allocation Percentages in Exhibit G and an assumption that all Subdivisions listed on Exhibit G will become Participating Subdivisions.
(ii) This minimum regional expenditure percentage is calculated on the Settling State's initial Abatement Accounts Fund allocation and does not include any additional amounts a Settling State has directed to its Abatement Accounts Fund from its State Fund, or any other amounts directed to the fund. A Settling State may dedicate more than 50% of its Abatement Accounts Fund to the regional expenditure and may annually adjust the percentage of its Abatement Accounts Fund dedicated to regional expenditures as long as the percentage remains above the minimum amount. (iii) The Settling State (1) has the authority to adjust the definition of the regions, and (2) may annually revise the percentages allocated to each region to reflect the number of Subdivisions in each region that are Non -Participating Subdivisions.
Subdivision Block Grants. Certain Subdivisions listed on Exhibit G shall be eligible to receive regional allocation funds in the form of a block grant for future Opioid Remediation. A Participating Subdivision listed on Exhibit G eligible for block grants is a county or parish (or in the case of States that do not have counties or parishes that function as political subdivisions, a city) that (1) does not contain a Litigating Subdivision or a Later Litigating Subdivision for which it has the authority to end the litigation through a release, Bar, or other action; (2) either (i) has a population of 400,000 or more or (ii) in the case of California has a population of 750,000 or more; and (3) has funded or otherwise managed an established health care or treatment infrastructure (e.g., health department or similar agency). Each Subdivision listed on. Exhibit G eligible to receive block grants shall be assigned its own region.
Cya
December 20, 2022
C. Small States. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection VIII.F.2.a, Settling States with populations under four (4) million that do not have existing regions described in subsection VIII.F.2.a shall not be required to establish regions. However, such a Settling State that contains one (1) or more Subdivisions listed on Exhibit G eligible for block grants under subsection VIII.F.2.b shall be divided regionally so that each block -grant eligible Subdivision listed on Exhibit G is a region and the remainder of the State is a region.
d. Advisory Committee. The Settling State shall designate an Opioid Settlement Remediation Advisory Committee (the "Advisory Committee") to provide input and recommendations regarding remediation spending from that Settling State's Abatement Accounts Fund. A Settling State may elect to use an existing advisory committee or similar entity (created outside of a State -Subdivision Agreement or Allocation Statute); provided, however, the Advisory Committee or similar entity shall meet the following requirements:
(i) Written guidelines that establish the formation and composition of the Advisory Committee, terms of service for members, contingency for removal or resignation of members, a schedule of meetings, and any other administrative details;
(ii) Composition that includes at least an equal number of local representatives as state representatives;
(iii) A process for receiving input from Subdivisions and other communities regarding how the opioid crisis is affecting their communities, their abatement needs, and proposals for abatement strategies and responses; and
(iv) A process by which Advisory Committee recommendations for expenditures for Opioid Remediation will be made to and considered by the appropriate state agencies.
3. Abatement Accounts Fund Reporting. The Settlement Fund Administrator shall track and assist in the report of remediation disbursements as agreed to among the Parties.
G. Nature of Payment. Allergan, the Settling States, the Participating Subdivisions, and the Participating Special Districts, acknowledge and agree that notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the scope of the Released Claims:
Allergan has entered into this Agreement to avoid the delay, expense, inconvenience, and uncertainty of further litigation;
2. The Settling States, the Participating Subdivisions, and the Participating Special Districts sought compensatory restitution (within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. 43 December 20, 2022
§ 162(f)(2)(A)) as damages for the Alleged Harms allegedly suffered by the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts;
3. By executing this Agreement the Settling States, the Participating Subdivisions, and the Participating Special Districts certify that: (a) the Compensatory Restitution Amount is no greater than the amount, in the aggregate, of the Alleged Harms allegedly suffered by the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts; and (b) the portion of the Compensatory Restitution Amount received by each Settling State, Participating Subdivision or Participating Special Districts is no greater than the amount of the Alleged Harms allegedly suffered by such Settling State, Participating Subdivision or Participating Special Districts;
4. The payment of the Compensatory Restitution Amount by Allergan constitutes, and is paid for, compensatory restitution (within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A)) for alleged damage or harm (as compensation for alleged damage or harm arising out of alleged bodily injury) allegedly caused by Allergan;
5. The Compensatory Restitution Amount is being paid as compensatory restitution (within the meaning of 26 U.S.C. § 162(f)(2)(A)) in order to restore, in whole or in part, the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts to the same position or condition that they would be in had the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts not suffered the Alleged Harms;
6. No portion of the Compensatory Restitution Amount represents reimbursement to any Settling State, Participating Subdivision, Participating Special District, or other person or entity for the costs of any investigation or litigation. The entire Compensatory Restitution Amount is properly characterized as described in subsection VIII.G. No portion of the Compensatory Restitution Amount constitutes disgorgement or is properly characterized as the payment of statutory or other fines, penalties, punitive damages, other punitive assessments, or attorneys' fees; and
7. The Designated State, on behalf of all Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts (the "Form 1098-F Filer") shall complete and file Form 1098-F with the Internal. Revenue Service on or before February 28 (March 31 if filed electronically) of the year following the calendar year in which the order entering this Agreement becomes binding. On the Form 1098-F, the Form 1098-F Filer shall identify the entire Compensatory Restitution Amount received by the Form 1098-F Filer as remediation/restitution. The Form 1098-F Filer shall. also, on or before January 31 of the year following the calendar year in which the order entering this Agreement becomes binding, furnish Copy B of such Form 1098-F (or an acceptable substitute statement) to Allergan.
IX. Participation by Subdivisions and Special Districts 44 December 20, 2022
A. Notice. No later than fifteen (15) days after the Preliminary Agreement Date, the Settling States, with the cooperation of Allergan, shall send individual written notice (which may be delivered via e-mail or other electronic means) of the opportunity to participate in this Agreement and the requirements of participation to all Subdivisions and Special Districts in the Settling State that are (1) Litigating Subdivisions or Litigating Special Districts, or (2) Non -Litigating Subdivisions listed in Exhibit G. To the extent a Non -Litigating Special District is entitled to an allocation for a direct payment through its inclusion in Exhibit G pursuant to a State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, Statutory Trust, or voluntary redistribution, the Settling States shall also send individual written notice (which may be delivered via e-mail or other electronic means) of the opportunity to participate in this Agreement and the requirements of participation to such Special District. Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, the version of Exhibit G used for notice shall be the one in place as of the Preliminary Agreement Date. Allergan's share of costs of the written notice shall be paid by Allergan as part of the Implementation Costs. Notice (which may be delivered via e-mail or other electronic means) shall also be provided simultaneously to counsel of record for Litigating Subdivisions, Litigating Special Districts, and known counsel for Non -Litigating Subdivisions listed on Exhibit G and Non -Litigating Special Districts listed on Exhibit G. The notice will include that the deadline for becoming an Initial Participating Subdivision or Initial Participating Special District is the Initial Participation Date. Nothing contained herein shall preclude a Settling State from providing further notice to or otherwise contacting any of its Subdivisions or Special Districts about becoming a Participating Subdivision or Participating Special District, including beginning any of the activities described in this paragraph prior to the Preliminary Agreement Date.
B. Requirements for Becoming a Participating Subdivision: Non -Litigating Subdivisions. A Non -Litigating Subdivision in a Settling State may become a Participating Subdivision by returning an executed Settlement Participation Form to the Implementation Administrator or Settlement Fund Administrator (which may be executed and returned by electronic means established by the Implementation Administrator or Settlement Fund Administrator) specifying (1) that the Subdivision agrees to the terms of this Agreement pertaining to Subdivisions, (2) that the Subdivision releases all Released Claims against all Released Entities, (3) that the Subdivision agrees to use monies it receives, if any, from the Settlement Fund pursuant to the applicable requirements of Section VIII, and (4) that the Subdivision submits to the jurisdiction of the Court where the Consent Judgment is filed for purposes limited to that Court's role under the Agreement. The required Settlement Participation Form is attached as Exhibit K. A Non -Litigating Subdivision will decide whether to become a Participating Subdivision for both this Agreement and the Teva Global Opioid Settlement Agreement, or neither. However, if Teva enters bankruptcy prior to the Effective Date, a Non -Litigating Subdivision can choose to only join this Agreement.
C. Requirements for Becoming a Participating Subdivision: Litigating Subdivisions%Later Litigating Subdivisions. A Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating Subdivision in a Settling State may become a Participating Subdivision by returning an executed Settlement Participation Form to the Implementation Administrator or Settlement Fund Administrator (which may be executed and returned by electronic means established by the Implementation Administrator or Settlement Fund Administrator) that, in addition to the requirements set out in subsection IX.B for Non -Litigating Subdivisions, commits it to 45 December 20, 2022
promptly dismissal its legal action. The required Settlement Participation Form is attached as Exhibit K. A Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating Subdivision will decide whether to become a Participating Subdivision for both this Agreement and the Teva Global Opioid Settlement Agreement, or neither. However, if Teva enters bankruptcy prior to the Effective Date, a Litigating Subdivision or Later Litigating Subdivision can choose to only join this Agreement. Except for trials begun before the Initial Participation Date, a Litigating Subdivision or a Later Litigating Subdivision may not become a Participating Subdivision after the completion of opening statements in a trial of a legal action it brought that includes a Released Claim against a Released Entity.
D. Initial Participating Subdivisions. A Subdivision qualifies as an Initial Participating Subdivision if it meets the applicable requirements for becoming a Participating Subdivision set forth in subsections IX.B or IX.0 by the Initial Participation Date. Provided however, all Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms shall be held by the Implementation Administrator until Allergan provides the notice in subsection X.B that it intends to proceed with the settlement, at which time the obligations created by such forms become effective. If Allergan determines not to proceed, all Settlement Participation Forms shall be returned to Counsel for Litigating Subdivisions or to the Subdivisions not represented by counsel or destroyed to the extent that such destruction is not prohibited by then existing document preservation obligations.
E. Later Participating Subdivisions. A Subdivision that is not an Initial Participating Subdivision may become a Later Participating Subdivision by meeting the applicable requirements for becoming a Participating Subdivision after the Initial Participation Date and agreeing to be subject to the terms of a State -Subdivision Agreement (if any) or any other structure adopted or applicable pursuant to subsections VIILE or VIII.F. The following provisions govern what a Later Participating Subdivision can receive (but do not apply to Initial Participating Subdivisions):
A Later Participating Subdivision shall not receive any share of any Base or Incentive Payments paid to the Subdivision Fund that were due before it became a Participating Subdivision.
2. A Later Participating Subdivision that becomes a Participating Subdivision after the Initial Participation Date but before June 15, 2023 shall receive 75% of the share of the Initial Year Payment that it would have received had it become an Initial Participating Subdivision (unless the Later Participating Subdivision is subject to subsections IX.E.3 or IX.E.4 below). A Later Participating Subdivision that becomes a Participating Subdivision after June 1.5, 2023 shall receive no share of the Initial Year Payment.
3. A Later Participating Subdivision that, after the Initial Participation Date, maintains a lawsuit for a Released Claim(s) against a Released Entity and has judgment entered against it on every such Claim before it became a Participating Subdivision (other than a consensual dismissal with prejudice) shall receive 50% of the share of future Base Payments or Incentive Payments that it would have received had it become a Later Participating Subdivision prior to such judgment; provided, 46 December 20, 2022
however, that if the Subdivision appeals the judgment and the judgment is affinned with finality before the Subdivision becomes a Participating Subdivision, the Subdivision shall not receive any share of any Base Payments or Incentive Payments.
4. A Later Participating Subdivision that becomes a Participating Subdivision while a Bar or Case -Specific Resolution involving a different Subdivision exists in its State shall receive 25% of the share of future Base Payments or Incentive Payments that it would have received had it become a Later Participating Subdivision without such Bar or Case -Specific Resolution.
F. No Increase in Payments. Amounts to be received by Later Participating Subdivisions or Later Participating Special Districts shall not increase the payments due from Allergan.
G. Ineligible Subdivisions and Special Districts. Prior Settling Subdivisions and Subdivisions and Special Districts in Non -Settling States or Prior Settling States are not eligible to be Participating Subdivisions or Participating Special Districts.
H. Non -Participating Subdivisions and Non -Participating Special Districts. Non - Participating Subdivisions and Non -Participating Special Districts shall not directly receive any portion of any Base Payments or Incentive Payments, including from the State Fund and direct distributions from the Abatement Accounts Fund; however, a Settling State may choose to fund future Opioid Remediation that indirectly benefits Non -Participating Subdivisions and Non -Participating Special Districts.
L Unpaid Allocations to Later Participating and Non -Participating Subdivisions. Any Base Payments and Incentive Payments allocated pursuant to subsection VILE to a Later Participating or Non -Participating Subdivision or a Later Participating or Non - Participating Special District that cannot be paid pursuant to Section IX, will be allocated to the Abatement Accounts Fund for the Settling State in which the Subdivision is located, unless those payments are redirected elsewhere by a State -Subdivision Agreement or by a Statutory Trust.
J. Requirements for Becoming a Participating Special District: Non -Litigating Special Districts. A Non -Litigating Special District in a Settling State may become a Participating Special District by returning an executed Settlement Participation Form to the Implementation Administrator or Settlement Fund Administrator (which may be executed and returned by electronic means established by the Implementation Administrator or Settlement Fund Administrator) specifying (1) that the Special District agrees to the terms of this Agreement pertaining to Special Districts, (2) that the Special District releases all Released Claims against all Released Entities, (3) that the Special District agrees to use monies it receives, if any, from the Settlement Fund pursuant to the applicable requirements of Section VIII, and (4) that the Special District submits to the jurisdiction of the Court where the Consent Judgment is filed for purposes limited to that Court's role under the Agreement. The required Settlement Participation Form is attached as Exhibit K. A Non - Litigating Special District will decide whether to become a Participating Special District for both this Agreement and the Teva Global. Opioid Settlement Agreement, or neither. 47 December 20, 2022
However, if Teva enters bankruptcy prior to the Effective Date, a Non -Litigating Special District can choose to only join this Agreement.
K. Requirements for Becoming a Participating Special District: Litigating Special Districts/Later Litigating Special Districts. A Litigating Special District or Later Litigating Special District in a Settling State may become a Participating Special District by returning an executed Settlement Participation Form to the Implementation Administrator or Settlement Fund Administrator (which may be executed and returned by electronic means established by the Implementation Administrator or Settlement Fund Administrator) that, in addition to the requirements set out in subsection IX.J for Non -Litigating Special Districts, commits it to promptly dismiss its legal action. The required Settlement Participation Form is attached as Exhibit K. A Litigating Special District or Later Litigating Special District will decide whether to become a Participating Special District for both this Agreement and the Teva Global Opioid Settlement Agreement, or neither. However, if Teva enters bankruptcy prior to the Effective Date, a Litigating Special District or Later Litigating Special District can choose to only join this Agreement. Except for trials begun before the Initial Participation Date, a Litigating Special District or a Later Litigating Special District may not become a Participating Special District after the completion of opening statements in a trial of a legal action it brought that includes a Released Claim against a Released Entity.
L. Initial Participating Special Districts. A Special District qualifies as an Initial Participating Special District if it meets the applicable requirements for becoming a Participating Special District set forth in subsections IX.J or IX.K by the Initial Participation Date. Provided however, all Special District Settlement Participation Forms shall be held by the Implementation Administrator until Allergan provides the notice in subsection X.B that it intends to proceed with the settlement, at which time the obligations created by such forms become effective.
M. Later Participating Special Districts. A Special District that is not an Initial Participating Special District may become a Later Participating Special District by meeting the applicable requirements for becoming a Participating Special District after the Initial Participation Date and agreeing to be subject to the terms of a State -Subdivision Agreement (if any) or any other structure adopted or applicable pursuant to subsections VIII.E or VIII.F. or any agreement reached by the applicable Settling State with Initial Participating Special Districts. The following provisions govern what a Later Participating Special District can receive (but do not apply to Initial Participating Special Districts):
Except for the Initial Year Payment, a Later Participating Special District shall not receive any share of any Base or Incentive Payments paid to the Subdivision Fund that were due before it became a Participating Special District.
2. A Later Participating Special District that becomes a Participating Special District after Initial Participation Date but before June 15, 2023 shall receive 75% of the share of the Initial Year Payment that it would have received had it become an Initial Participating Special District (unless the Later Participating Special District is subject to subsections IX.M.3 or IX.M.4 below). A Later Participating Special 48 December 20, 2022
District that becomes a Participating Special District after June 15, 2023 shall receive no share of the Initial Year Payment.
3. A Later Participating Special District that, after the Initial Participation Date, maintains a lawsuit for a Released Claim(s) against a Released Entity and has judgment entered against it on every such Claim before it became a Participating Special District (other than a consensual dismissal with prejudice) shall receive 50% of the share of future Base Payments or Incentive Payments that it would have received had it become a Later Participating Special District prior to such judgment; provided, however, that if the Special District appeals the judgment and the judgment is affirmed with finality before the Special District becomes a Participating Special District, the Special District shall not receive any share of any Base Payments or Incentive Payments.
4. A Later Participating Special District that becomes a Participating Special District while a Bar or Case -Specific Resolution involving a different Special District exists in its State shall receive 25% of the share of future Base Payments or Incentive Payments that it would have received had it become a Later Participating Special District without such Bar or Case -Specific Resolution.
X. Condition to Effectiveness of Agreement and Filing of Consent Judgment A. Determination to Proceed With Settlement. Allergan will determine on or before the Reference Date whether there has been a sufficient resolution of the Claims of the Subdivisions and Special Districts in the Settling States (through participation under Section IX, Case -Specific Resolution(s), and Bar(s)) to proceed with this Agreement. The determination shall be in the sole discretion of Allergan, in good faith, and may be based on any criteria or factors deemed relevant by Allergan.
B. Notice by Allergan. On or before the Reference Date, Allergan shall inform the Settling States and MDL Plaintiffs' Executive Committee of its determination pursuant to subsection X.A. If Allergan determines to proceed, the Parties will proceed to file the Consent Judgments. If Allergan determines not to proceed, this Agreement will have no further effect and all releases (including those given by Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts) and other commitments or obligations contained herein will be void and Settlement Participation Forms returned to the Subdivision or Special District or destroyed to the extent not prohibited by then existing legal obligations or document holds.
Xl. Potential Payment Adjustments
A. Settlement Class Resolution Opt Outs. If a Settling State is eligible for Incentive A on the basis of a Settlement Class Resolution, and a Primary Subdivision that opted out of the Settlement Class Resolution maintains a lawsuit asserting a Released Claim against a Released Entity, the following shall apply. If the lawsuit asserting a Released Claim either survives a Threshold Motion or has an unresolved Threshold Motion fewer than sixty (60) days prior to the scheduled start of a trial involving a Released Claim, and is resolved with 49 December 20, 2022
finality on terms requiring payment by the Released Entity, Allergan shall receive a dollar - for -dollar offset for the amount paid against its obligation to make remaining Incentive A payments that would be apportioned to that State or Participating Subdivisions listed on Exhibit G.
B. Revoked Bar, Settlement Class Resolution, or Case -Specific Resolution.
If Allergan made a payment as a result of the existence of a Bar, Settlement Class Resolution, or Case -Specific Resolution in a Settling State, and that Bar, Settlement Class Resolution, or Case -Specific Resolution is subject to a Revocation Event, Allergan shall receive a dollar -for -dollar offset against its obligation to make remaining payments that would be apportioned to that State or Participating Subdivisions or Participating Special Districts listed on Exhibit G. This offset will be calculated as the dollar amount difference between (1) the total amount of Incentive Payments paid by Allergan during the time the Bar, Settlement Class Resolution, or Case -Specific Resolution subject to the Revocation Event was in effect, and (2) the total amount of Incentive Payments that would have been due from Allergan during that time without the Bar, Settlement Class Resolution, or Case -Specific Resolution subject to the Revocation Event being in effect. The amount of Incentive Payments that would have been due, referenced in (2) above, will be calculated based on considering any Subdivision or Special District that provides a release within one hundred eighty (180) days after the Revocation Event as having been a Participating Subdivision or Participating Special District (in addition to all other Participating Subdivisions and Participating Special Districts) during the time that the Bar, Settlement Class Resolution, or Case -Specific Resolution subject to the Revocation Event was in effect. If a Revocation Event causes a Settling State to no longer qualify for one or both parts of Incentive D, the Settling State and its Exhibit G participants shall return to Allergan all relevant payments made under Incentive D through offsets as set forth above.
2. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in paragraph 1 above, if a Bar or Case - Specific Resolution is reinstated by the Settling State, either through the same or different means as the initial Bar or Case -Specific Resolution, Allergan's right to an offset is extinguished and any amounts withheld to offset amounts paid on account of the revoked, rescinded, reversed, or overruled Bar or Case -Specific Resolution shall be returned to the Settling State, less and except any Incentive Payments that would have been paid during the period in which the Bar or Case - Specific Resolution was revoked, rescinded, reversed, or overruled.
X11. Additional Restitution Amount
A. Additional Restitution Amount. Allergan shall pay an Additional Restitution Amount to each Settling State listed in Exhibit N in the amount and on the schedule set forth in Exhibit M. The maximum Additional Restitution Amount of $16,1.92,680.76 shall be reduced by the allocation set forth on Exhibit N for any Non -Settling States listed on Exhibit N. The Settlement Fund Administrator shall allocate such funds among and within the Settling 50 December 20, 2022
States listed in Exhibit N at the same time as its allocation of Annual Payments pursuant to Section VII.B.
B. Additional Restitution Amount funds shall not be subject to allocation as provided in Sections VIILD through VIILF
XIII. Plaintiffs' Attorneys' Fees and Costs
A. Attorneys' fees and costs are addressed in the following exhibits and are incorporated herein by reference:
The State Outside Counsel Fee Fund is addressed in Exhibit U.
The State Cost Fund is addressed in Exhibit S.
3. The Attorney Fee and Cost Fund is addressed and the Agreement on Attorneys' Fees, Expenses and Costs is set forth in Exhibit R.
XIV. Enforcement and Dispute Resolution
A. Enforceability. The terms of the Agreement and Consent Judgment applicable to or in a Settling State will be enforceable solely by that Settling State and Allergan. Settling States or Participating Subdivisions shall not have enforcement rights with respect either to the terms of this Agreement that apply only to or in other States or to any Consent Judgment entered into by another Settling State. Participating Subdivisions shall not have enforcement rights against Allergan with respect to the Agreement or any Consent Judgment except as to payments that would be allocated to the Subdivision Fund or Abatement Accounts Fund pursuant to Section VII; provided, however, that each Settling State shall allow Participating Subdivisions in that State to notify it of any perceived violations of the Agreement or Consent Judgment.
B. Consent to Jurisdiction and Service of Process. Allergan consents to the jurisdiction of the Court in which the Consent Judgment is filed, and any appellate court thereof, limited to resolution of disputes identified in subsection XIV.G.2; for a civil action for any appropriate relief to enforce compliance with the Parties' Agreement for Injunctive Relief pursuant to Exhibit P, Section K.5 herein; and for any proceedings for or related to the enforcement or collection of any payments on the Consent Judgment for resolution in the Court in which the Consent Judgment is filed. Allergan further agrees any service of process or notice required for such action or proceeding may be effectuated on Allergan through delivery of all required papers by hand or by a nationally recognized private courier on Allergan's representatives identified in Section XVI,P herein. To be clear, for the purposes of this Agreement only, Allergan consents to personal jurisdiction before such courts, and will not contend service must be effectuated through personal service of the Hague Convention process.
C. Specific Terms Dispute Resolution.
51 December 20, 2022
Any dispute that is addressed by the provisions set forth in the Injunctive Relief Terms in Exhibit P shall be resolved as provided therein and pursuant to Section VIII.E.3 herein.
2. In the event Allergan believes the 85% threshold established in subsection VIII.B is not being satisfied, any Party may request that Allergan and the Enforcement Committee meet and confer regarding the use of funds under subsection VIILB.
The completion of such meet -and -confer process is a precondition to further action regarding any such dispute. Further action concerning subsection VIII.B shall: (i) be limited to Allergan seeking to reduce its Annual Payments by no more than 5% of the difference between the actual amount of Opioid Remediation and the 85% threshold established in subsection VIII.B; (ii) only reduce Annual Payments to those Settling States and its Participating Subdivisions that are below the 85% threshold established in subsection VIII.B; and (ill) not reduce Annual Payments restricted to future Opioid Remediation.
D. State -Subdivision Enforcement.
A Participating Subdivision shall not have enforcement rights against a Settling State in which it is located with respect to the Agreement or any Consent Judgment except: (1) as provided for in a State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, or Statutory Trust with respect to intrastate allocation; or (2) in the absence of a State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, or Statutory Trust, as to allegations that: (a) the Settling State's use of Abatement Accounts Fund monies were not used for uses similar to or in the nature of those uses contained in Exhibit E; or (b) a Settling State failed to pay funds directly from the Abatement Accounts Fund to a Participating Subdivision eligible to receive a block grant pursuant to subsection VIII.F.2.b.
2. A Settling State shall have enforcement rights against a Participating Subdivision located in its territory: (1) as provided for in a State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, or Statutory Trust; or (2) in the absence of a State -Subdivision Agreement, Allocation Statute, or Statutory Trust, as to allegations that the uses of Abatement Accounts Fund monies by Participating Subdivisions listed on Exhibit G were not for uses similar to or in the nature of those uses contained in Exhibit E.
3. As between Settling States and Participating Subdivisions, the above rights are contractual in nature and nothing herein is intended to limit, restrict, change, or alter any other existing rights under law.
E. Enforcement Committee Actions to Enforce Agreement.
The Parties agree that in the event of any failure by Allergan to make any required payments under this Agreement, the Enforcement Committee, on its own or through its designee such as a Settling State or Participating Subdivision acting by its authorization and on its behalf, shall have the ability and right to file an action or proceeding in any New York state court, or federal court of the United States of 52 December 20, 2022
America, sitting in New York, for or related to the enforcement or collection of such payments.
If any National Dispute involving a Settling State, Participating Subdivision, and/or Allergan is pending before a National Arbitration Panel concerning a given year's payment to all Settling States, any action or proceeding pursuant to this subsection XIV.E shall be stayed as to any disputed amounts only, but may proceed as to any and all undisputed amounts. In the event there is a dispute between the Parties as to the disputed amounts at issue, the Enforcement Committee or any party to that dispute may seek an expedited determination from the National Arbitration Panel for that proceeding as to the disputed and undisputed amounts.
The Parties further Agree that in the event of Allergan's breach of the Parties' Agreement for Injunctive Relief (Exhibit P attached hereto), the Enforcement Committee, on its own or through a single designee such as a Settling State shall have the ability and right to file a civil action pursuant to Exhibit P, after completing the processes laid out in Exhibit P, in any New York state court, or federal court of the United States of America, sitting in New York, seeking any appropriate relief to enforce compliance with such Agreement for Injunctive Relief.
4. Allergan and other Released Entities consent to the jurisdiction of the New York state court, or federal court of the United States of America, sitting in New York, and any appellate court from any thereof, in which any action or proceeding is initiated pursuant to this subsection XIV.E, and for enforcement or collection of any related judgment entered by such court. Allergan further agrees any service of process or notice required for such action or proceeding, including for any action or proceeding for enforcement or collection of any judgment entered thereon, may be effectuated on Allergan through delivery of all required papers by hand or by a nationally recognized private courier on Allergan's representatives identified in Section XVLP herein. For the purposes of this Agreement only, Allergan consents to personal jurisdiction before such courts and will not contend service must be effectuated through personal service or the Hague Convention process.
The enforcement rights under this subsection XIV.E are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other enforcement and collection rights of the Parties herein, including but not limited to enforcement rights as to payments as allowed by subsection XV.A.
F. Subdivision Payment Enforcement. A Participating Subdivision shall have the same right as a Settling State pursuant to subsection XIV.G.4.a(iv) to seek resolution of any failure by Allergan to make its required Base Payments and/or Incentive Payments in a Payment Year.
G. Other Dispute Resolution Terms.
Except as provided in subsection VIII.C, the parties to a dispute shall promptly meet and confer in good faith to resolve any dispute prior to any filing or 53 December 20, 2022
presentation to the Court or National Arbitration Panel. If the parties cannot resolve the dispute informally, and unless otherwise agreed in writing, they shall follow the remaining provisions of this Section XIV to resolve the dispute.
Except as provided in subsections XIV.0 and XIV.G.4, disputes not resolved informally shall be resolved in either the Court that entered the relevant Consent Judgment or, if no Consent Judgment was entered, a state or territorial court with jurisdiction located wherever the seat of state government is located. State court proceedings shall be governed by the rules and procedures of the forum. For the avoidance of doubt, disputes to be resolved in state court include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. disputes concerning whether expenditures qualify for Opioid Remediation; b. disputes between a Settling State and Participating Subdivisions located in such Settling State as provided by subsection XIV.D, except to the extent the State -Subdivision Agreement provides for other dispute resolution mechanisms. For the avoidance of doubt, disputes between a Settling State and any Participating Subdivision shall not be considered National Disputes;
whether this Agreement and relevant Consent Judgment are binding under state law;
d. the extent of the Attorney General's or other participating entity's authority under state law, including the extent of the authority to release Claims; whether the requirements of a Bar, a Case -Specific Resolution, State - Specific Finality, Later Litigating Subdivision, Litigating Subdivision, or a Threshold Motion have been met; and
f all other disputes not specifically identified in subsections XIV.0 and XIV.G.4.
Any Party may request that the National Arbitration Panel provide an interpretation of any provision of the settlement that is relevant to the state court determination, and the National Arbitration Panel shall make reasonable best efforts to supply such interpretation within the earlier of thirty (30) days or the time period required by the state court proceedings. Any Party may submit that interpretation to the state court to the extent permitted by, and for such weight provided by, the state court's rules and procedures. If requested by a Party, the National Arbitration Panel shall request that its interpretation be accepted in the form of an amicus curiae brief, and any attorneys' fees and costs for preparing any such filing shall be paid for by the requesting Party.
4. National Disputes involving a Settling State, Participating Subdivision, and/or Allergan shall be resolved by a National Arbitration Panel. 54 December 20, 2022
a. "National Disputes" are disputes that are exceptions to subsection XIV.G.2's presumption of resolution in state courts because they involve issues of interpretation of Agreement terms applicable to all Settling States without reference to a particular State's law. Disputes between a State and any Participating Subdivisions shall not be considered National Disputes.
National Disputes are limited to the following:
(i) the amount of offset and/or credit attributable to Non -Settling States;
(ii) issues involving the scope and definition of "Product"; (iii) interpretation and application of the terms "Covered Conduct" and "Released Entities";
(iv) disputes over a given year's Annual Payment or the payment of the Additional Restitution Amount to all Settling States (for the avoidance of doubt, disputes between a Settling State and Allergan over the amounts owed to only that State shall not be considered National Disputes);
(v) questions regarding the performance and/or removal of the Settlement Fund Administrator;
(vi) disputes involving liability of successor entities; (vii) disputes that require a determination of sufficient Subdivision and Special District participation to qualify for Incentives A, B, C, or D,; (viii) disputes that require interpretation of Agreement terms (i) that concretely affect four (4) or more Settling States; and (ii) do not turn on unique definitions and interpretations under State law; and (ix) any dispute subject to resolution under subsection XIV.G.2 but for which all parties to the dispute agree to arbitration before the National Arbitration Panel under the provisions of this subsection XIV.G.4.
b. The "National Arbitration Panel" shall be comprised of three (3) neutral arbitrators. One (1) arbitrator shall be chosen by Allergan, one (1) arbitrator shall be chosen by the Enforcement Committee with due input from Participating Subdivisions, and the third arbitrator shall be agreed upon by the first two (2) arbitrators. The membership of the National Arbitration Panel is intended to remain constant throughout the term of this Agreement, but in the event that replacements are required, the retiring arbitrator shall be replaced by the party that selected him/her.
55 December 20, 2022
(i) The National Arbitration Panel shall make reasonable best efforts to decide all matters within one hundred eighty (180) days of filing, and in no event shall it take longer than one (1) year. (ii) The National Arbitration Panel shall conduct all proceedings in a reasonably streamlined process consistent with an opportunity for the parties to be heard. Issues shall be resolved without the need for live witnesses where feasible, and with a presumption in favor of remote participation to minimize the burdens on the parties. (iii) To the extent allowed under state law, a Settling State, Participating Subdivision, and (at any party's request) the National Arbitration Panel may certify to an appropriate state court any question of state law. The National Arbitration Panel shall be bound by a final state court determination of such a certified question. The time period for the arbitration shall be tolled during the course of the certification process.
(iv) The arbitrators will give due deference to any authoritative interpretation of state law, including any declaratory judgment or similar relief obtained by a Settling State, Participating Subdivision, or Allergan on a state law issue.
(v) The decisions of the National Arbitration Panel shall be binding on Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, Allergan, and the Settlement Fund Administrator. In any proceeding before the National Arbitration Panel involving a dispute between a Settling State and Allergan whose resolution could prejudice the rights of a Participating Subdivision(s) or Participating Special District(s) in that Settling State, such Participating Subdivision(s) or Participating Special District(s) shall be allowed to file a statement of view in the proceeding.
C. Nothing herein shall be construed so as to limit or otherwise restrict a State from seeking injunctive or other equitable relief in state court to protect the health, safety, or welfare of its citizens.
d. Each party shall bear its own costs in any arbitration or court proceeding arising under this subsection XIV.G. The costs for the arbitrators on the National Arbitration Panel shall be divided and paid equally by the disputing sides for each individual dispute, e.g., a dispute between Allergan and Settling States/Participating Subdivisions shall be split 50% by Allergan and 50% by the Settling States/Participating Subdivisions that are parties to the dispute; a dispute between a Settling State and a Participating Subdivision shall be split 50% by the Settling State and 50% by any Participating Subdivisions that are party to the dispute. 56 December 20, 2022
5. Prior to initiating an action to enforce pursuant to this subsection XIV.G, the complaining party must:
a. Provide written notice to the Enforcement Committee of its complaint, including the provision of the Consent Judgment and/or Agreement that the practice appears to violate, as well as the basis for its interpretation of the disputed provision. The Enforcement Committee shall establish a reasonable process and timeline for obtaining additional information from the involved parties; provided, however, that the date the Enforcement Committee establishes for obtaining additional information from the parties shall not be more than forty-five (45) days following the notice. The Enforcement Committee may advise the involved parties of its views on the complaint and/or seek to resolve the complaint informally. b. Wait to commence any enforcement action until thirty (30) days after the date that the Enforcement Committee establishes for obtaining additional information from the involved parties.
6. If the parties to a dispute cannot agree on the proper forum for resolution of the dispute under the provisions of subsections XIV.G.2 or XIV.G.4, a committee comprising the Enforcement Committee and sufficient representatives of Allergan such that the members of the Enforcement Committee have a majority of one (1) member will determine the forum where the dispute will be initiated within twenty- eight (28) days of receiving notification of the dispute relating to the proper forum.
The forum identified by such committee shall be the sole forum for determining where the dispute shall be heard, and the committee's identification of such forum shall not be entitled to deference by the forum selected.
H. No Effect. Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to limit the Settling State's Civil Investigative Demand ("CID") or investigative subpoena authority, to the extent such authority exists under applicable state law and the CID or investigative subpoena is issued pursuant to such authority, and Allergan reserves all of its rights in connection with a CID or investigative subpoena issued pursuant to such authority.
XV. JudMment and Settlement Set -Off Related to Teva
A. The Parties recognize that some of the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts are pursuing Claims against Teva Ltd., Teva USA, Cephalon, Divested Actavis Generic Entities, and/or other Divested Entities, and/or each of their respective parents, subsidiaries, and/or affiliates. If any of them achieves a judgment by verdict, judicial decision, or means other than settlement against any of Teva Ltd., Teva USA, Cephalon, Divested Actavis Generic Entities, and/or other Divested Entities, and/or each of their respective parents, subsidiaries, and/or affiliates, each plaintiff listed above shall represent and agree that any payment(s) that the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts or their counsel receives from Teva Ltd., Teva USA, Cephalon, Divested Actavis Generic Entities, and/or other Divested Entities, and/or each of their respective parents, subsidiaries, and/or affiliates 57 December 20, 2022
reflects the amount over and above 56% of the amount they or their counsel received from the Global Settlement Amount due under this Agreement that each and all of them deem to reflect a fair overall settlement value for liability attributable to the generic opioid drugs that are Products distributed and/or sold before August 2, 2016 by Divested Actavis Generic Entities and/or other Divested Entities and/or attributable to the operation of the Divested Actavis Generic Entities and/or other Divested Entities related to those generic opioid drugs that are Products before August 2, 2016.
B. The Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts may reach a settlement agreement with Teva Ltd., Teva USA, Cephalon, Divested Actavis Generic Entities, and/or other Divested Entities, and/or each of their respective parents, subsidiaries, and/or affiliates that resolves some or all of their respective Claims. In that event, the Releasors represent and agree that any payment(s) that the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts or their counsel receives from Teva Ltd., Teva USA, Cephalon, Divested Actavis Generic Entities, and/or other Divested Entities, and/or each of their respective parents, subsidiaries, and/or affiliates reflects the amount over and above 56% of the amount they or they counsel received from the Global Settlement Amount due under this Agreement that each and all of them deem to reflect a fair overall settlement value for liability attributable to the generic opioid drugs that are Products distributed and/or sold before August 2, 2016 by Divested Actavis Generic Entities and/or other Divested Entities and/or attributable to the operation of the Divested Actavis Generic Entities and/or other Divested Entities related to those generic opioid drugs that are Products before August 2, 2016. In any such settlement agreement with Teva Ltd., Teva USA, Cephalon, Divested Actavis Generic Entities, and/or other Divested Entities, and/or each of their respective parents, subsidiaries, and/or affiliates, the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts agree that the agreed settlement amount reflects the value the parties to the agreement deem a fair settlement value over and above the payments made or due to be paid under the Allergan Public Global Opioid Settlement Agreement for generic opioid drugs that are Products distributed and/or sold before August 2, 2016 by Divested Actavis Generic Entities and/or other Divested Entities and/or relate to the operation of Divested Actavis Generic Entities and other Divested Entities related to those generic opioid drugs that are Products before August 2, 2016.
XVI. Miscellaneous
A. No Admission. Allergan does not admit liability or wrongdoing. Neither this Agreement nor the Consent Judgments shall be considered, construed, or represented to be (1) an admission, concession, or evidence of liability or wrongdoing or (2) a waiver or any limitation of any defense otherwise available to Allergan.
B. Population of Subdivisions. The population figures for Subdivisions shall be the published U.S. Census Bureau's population estimates for July 1, 2019, released May 2020. These population figures shall remain unchanged during the term of this Agreement.
C. Population of Special Districts. For any purpose in this Agreement in which the population of a Special District is used: (a) School Districts' population will be measured by the 58 December 20, 2022
number of students enrolled who are eligible under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ("IDEA") or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; (b) Health Districts' and Hospital Districts' population will be measured at 25% of discharges; and (c) all other Special Districts' (including Fire Districts' and Library Districts') population will be measured at 10% of the population served.
D. Population Associated with Sheriffs. For any purpose in this Agreement in which the population associated with a lawsuit by a sheriff is used, the population will be measured at 20% of the capacity of the jail(s) operated by the sheriff.
E. Most -Favored -Nation Provision.
If Allergan enters into any settlement agreement with any Non -Settling State after November 23, 2022 that resolves Claims similar in scope to the Claims released by a Settling State under this Agreement on overall payment terms that are more favorable to such Non -Settling State on a net present value basis (calculated with a 7% discount rate) on overall payment terms the Non -Settling State would have received under this Agreement based on the same level of participation, then the Settling States, individually or collectively, may elect to seek review, pursuant to Section XVI.E.3, of the overall payment terms of this Agreement and the Non - Settling State agreement so that the Settling State(s) may obtain, with respect to Allergan, overall payment terms at least as favorable as those obtained by such Non -Settling State. "Overall payment terms" refers to consideration of all payment terms of the two agreements, taken together, including, but not limited to the amount of payments, the timing of payments, and conditions or contingencies on payments.
2. For any settlement with a Non -Settling State involving Released Claims, Allergan shall provide the Enforcement Committee with a copy of the settlement agreement or relevant Consent Judgment within thirty (30) calendar days of the consummation of such settlement. The Enforcement Committee will promptly distribute such copy to all Settling States.
3. In the event that one or more Settling State(s) believes that the overall payment terms of an agreement by Allergan with a Non -Settling State are more favorable to the Non -Settling State, when compared based on the totality of the considerations set forth in Section XVI.E.1, the Settling State(s) and Allergan shall engage in the following process:
a. The Settling State(s) shall provide notice, within sixty (60) calendar days of the date on which a settlement agreement or Consent Judgment is provided to the Enforcement Committee, to Allergan of its intent to seek revision of this Agreement to provide payment terms that are, on an overall basis, as favorable as those obtained by the Non -Settling State. Such notice shall be confidential and not disclosed publicly to the extent allowed by law and shall state, in detail, the basis for the Settling State's belief that it is entitled to a revision of the Agreement.
59 December 20, 2022
b. Allergan shall, within thirty (30) calendar days, provide a response to the Settling State(s), explaining its position, in detail, as to whether the Settling State(s) is entitled to more favorable overall payment terms than those provided for in this Agreement.
In the event the Settling State(s) and Allergan do not reach agreement as to the application of Section XVI.E.1, the Settling State(s) may petition the National Arbitration Panel to seek a ruling from the Panel as to the applicability of Section XVI.E.1, provided that the Settling State(s) may seek such review only if at least five (5) Settling States co-sign the petition.
The Panel shall consider submissions and argument by the parties pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section XIV.G.4.
d. The Settling State(s) and Allergan shall be bound by the determination of the National Arbitration Panel.
4. This Section XVLE does not apply to, and there is no ability of any Settling State to seek or obtain revision of this Agreement based on, any Non -Settling State agreement with Allergan that is entered into: (a) either the earlier of (i) after the close of expert discovery or (ii) after a date ninety (90) calendar days prior to the scheduled start date of a trial between Allergan and the Non -Settling State or any severed or bifurcated portion thereof, provided that, where, in order to complete a settlement, a Non -Settling State and Allergan jointly request an adjournment of the scheduled start date of a trial within ninety (90) days of that date, this exception will apply as if the trial date had not been adjourned; (b) with a Non -Settling State that previously litigated to judgment a case related to opioids against any manufacturer, distributor, or pharmacy; or (c) the earlier of (i) after a Non -Settling State has obtained any court order or judicial determination that grants judgment (in whole or in part) against Allergan in the Non -Settling State's case, (ii) after a sanctions ruling against Allergan in the Non -Settling State's case against Allergan; or (iii) after any ruling has issued in the Non -Settling State's case against any manufacturer, distributor, or pharmacy on the issue of joint and several liability.
The National Arbitration Panel shall have no power to review agreements that satisfy any of the conditions described in this paragraph.
This Section does not apply to, and there is no ability of any Settling State to seek or obtain revision of this Agreement based on, any agreement between Allergan and (a) federally -recognized tribe(s),(b) Non -Participating Subdivisions or (3) Non -Participating Special Districts. This Section XVLE will not apply to any agreement entered into more than six (6) months after the Reference Date.
F. Tax Reporting and Cooperation.
The Parties agree that, unless otherwise required by law, Allergan's payment of the Compensatory Restitution Amount (after all applicable offsets) payable by Allergan shall be directed to Opioid Remediation for restitution of Alleged Harms allegedly caused by Allergan. By executing this Agreement (or the Settlement 60 December 20, 2022
Participation Form and thereby becoming a signatory to this Agreement), each Settling State, Participating Subdivision, and Participating Special District certify that: (1) the entity suffered Alleged Harms allegedly caused by Allergan; (2) the Compensatory Restitution Amount to be paid by Allergan to the entity represent an amount that is less than or equal to the actual monetary damage allegedly caused by Allergan; and (3) the entity shall use such payments for the sole purpose of Opioid Remediation.
2. Upon request by Allergan, the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts agree to perform such further acts and to execute and deliver such further documents as may be reasonably necessary for Allergan to establish the statements set forth in subsection VIILG to the satisfaction of their tax advisors, their independent financial auditors, the Internal Revenue Service, or any other governmental authority, including as contemplated by Treasury Regulations Section 1. 162-21 (b)(3)(ii) and any subsequently proposed or finalized relevant regulations or administrative guidance.
3. Without limiting the generality of subsection XVLF, each Settling State, Participating Subdivision, and Participating Special District shall cooperate in good faith with Allergan with respect to any tax claim, dispute, investigation, audit, examination, contest, litigation, or other proceeding relating to this Agreement.
4. The Designated State, on behalf of all Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts, shall designate one of its officers or employees to act as the "appropriate official" within the meaning of Treasury Regulations Section 1.6050X-I(f)(1)(11)(B) (the "Appropriate Official").
5. Neither Allergan nor the Settling States, Participating Subdivisions, and Participating Special Districts make any warranty or representation to any Settling jurisdiction or Releasor as to the tax consequences of the payment of the Compensatory Restitution Amount (or any portion thereof).
G. No Third -Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, no portion of this Agreement shall provide any rights to, or be enforceable by, any person or entity that is not a Settling State or Released Entity. No Settling State may assign or otherwise convey any right to enforce any provision of this Agreement.
H. Calculation. Any figure or percentage referred to in this Agreement shall be carried to seven decimal places.
I. Construction. None of the Parties and no Participating Subdivision shall be considered to be the drafter of this Agreement or of any of its provisions for the purpose of any statute, case law, or rule of interpretation or construction that would or might cause any provision to be construed against the drafter of this Agreement. The headings of the provisions of this Agreement are not binding and are for reference only and do not limit, expand, or otherwise affect the contents or meaning of this Agreement. 61 December 20, 2022
I Cooperation. Each Party and each Participating Subdivision agrees to use its best efforts and to cooperate with the other Parties and Participating Subdivisions to cause this Agreement and the Consent Judgments to become effective, to obtain all necessary approvals, consents and authorizations, if any, and to execute all documents and to take such other action as may be appropriate in connection herewith. Consistent with the foregoing, each Party and each Participating Subdivision agrees that it will not directly or indirectly assist or encourage any challenge to this Agreement or any Consent Judgment by any other person, and will support the integrity and enforcement of the terms of this Agreement and the Consent Judgments.
K. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, its exhibits and any other attachments, including the attorneys' fees and cost agreement in Exhibit R, embodies the entire agreement and understanding between and among the Parties and Participating Subdivisions relating to the subject matter hereof and supersedes (1) all prior agreements and understandings relating to such subject matter, whether written or oral and (2) all purportedly contemporaneous oral agreements and understandings relating to such subject matter.
L. Execution. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and by different signatories on separate counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall together be one and the same Agreement. One or more counterparts of this Agreement may be delivered by facsimile or electronic transmission with the intent that it or they shall constitute an original counterpart hereof. One or more counterparts of this Agreement may be signed by electronic signature.
M. Good Faith and Voluntary Entry. Each Party warrants and represents that it negotiated the terms of this Agreement in good faith. Each of the Parties and signatories to this Agreement warrants and represents that it freely and voluntarily entered into this Agreement without any degree of duress or compulsion. The Parties state that no promise of any kind or nature whatsoever (other than the written terms of this Agreement) was made to them to induce them to enter into this Agreement.
N. No Prevailing Party. The Parties each agree that they are not the prevailing party in this action, for purposes of any Claim for fees, costs, or expenses as prevailing parties arising under common law or under the terms of any statute, because the Parties have reached a good faith settlement. The Parties each further waive any right to challenge or contest the validity of this Agreement on any ground, including, without limitation, that any term is unconstitutional or is preempted by, or in conflict with, any current or future law.
O. Non -Admissibility. The settlement negotiations resulting in this Agreement have been undertaken by the Parties and by certain representatives of the Participating Subdivisions in good faith and for settlement purposes only, and no evidence of negotiations or discussions underlying this Agreement shall be offered or received in evidence in any action or proceeding for any purpose. This Agreement shall not be offered or received in evidence in any action or proceeding for any purpose other than in an action or proceeding arising under or relating to this Agreement or in any litigation or arbitration concerning Allergan's right to coverage under an insurance contract. 62 December 20, 2022
P. Notices. All notices or other communications under this Agreement shall be in writing (including but not limited to electronic communications) and shall be given to the recipients indicated below:
For the Attorney(s) General:
Josh Stein, Attorney General
North Carolina Department of Justice
Attn: Daniel Mosteller
PO Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602
Dmosteller@,)ncdoj.gov
Tom Miller, Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General of Iowa
Attn: Nathan Blake
1305 E. Walnut St.
Des Moines, IA 50319
Jonathan Skrmetti, Attorney General
Office of the Tennessee Attorney General
Attn: Michael Leftwich
P.O. Box 20207
Nashville, TN, 37202-0207
2. For the Plaintiffs' Executive Committee:
Paul F. Farrell
Farrell Law
P.O. Box 1.180
Huntington, WV 2571.4-1.1.80
Jayne Conroy
Simmons Hanly Conroy LLC
112 Madison Avenue, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10016-7416
[email protected]
Joseph F. Rice
Motley Rice LLC
28 Bridgeside Blvd.
Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
[email protected]
Peter Mougey
63 December 20, 2022
Levin Papantonio Rafferty
316 South Baylen St.
Pensacola, FL 32502
[email protected]
Paul J. Geller
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
120 East Palmetto Park Road
Boca Raton, FL 33432
[email protected]
Steven Skikos
Skikos, Crawford, Skikos & Joseph, LLC
One Sansom Street, Suite 2830
San Francisco, CA 94104
[email protected]
For Allergan:
Office of General Counsel
One North Waukegan Road
North Chicago, IL 60064
Copy to Allergan's attorneys at:
James F. Hurst, P.C.
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
300 North LaSalle
Chicago, IL 60654
[email protected]
Any Parry or the Plaintiffs' Executive Committee may change or add the contact information of the persons designated to receive notice on its behalf by notice given (effective upon the giving of such notice) as provided in this subsection.
Q. No Waiver. The waiver of any rights conferred hereunder shall be effective only if made by written instrument executed by the waiving Party or Parties. The waiver by any Party of any breach of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be or construed as a waiver of any other breach, whether prior, subsequent, or contemporaneous, nor shall such waiver be deemed to be or construed as a waiver by any other Party.
R. Preservation of Privilege. Nothing contained in this Agreement or any Consent Judgment, and no act required to be performed pursuant to this Agreement or any Consent Judgment, is intended to constitute, cause, or effect any waiver (in whole or in part) of any attorney - client privilege, work product protection, or common interest/joint defense privilege, and each Party agrees that it shall not make or cause to be made in any forum any assertion to the contrary.
S. Successors
64 December 20, 2022
The Agreement shall be binding upon, and insure to the benefit of, Allergan and its respective successors and assigns.
2. Prior to Allergan's last Payment Date, Allergan shall not sell the majority of its voting stock or substantially all its assets without obtaining the acquiror's agreement that it will constitute a successor with respect to Allergan's obligations under this Agreement.
3. Prior to Allergan's last Payment Date, Allergan shall not in one (1) transaction, or a series of related transactions, sell, or transfer assets (other than sales or transfers of inventories, or sales or transfers to an entity owed directly or indirectly by Allergan) having a fair market value equal to twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the consolidated assets of Allergan where the sale or transfer transaction is announced after the Reference Date, is not for fair consideration, and would foreseeably and unreasonably jeopardize Allergan's ability to make the payments under this Agreement that are due on or before the third Payment Date following the close of a sale or transfer transaction. The above restriction shall not apply if Allergan obtains the acquiror's agreement that it will be either a guarantor of or successor to the percentage of Allergan's remaining Payment Obligations under this Agreement equal to the percentage of Allergan's consolidated assets being sold or transferred in such transaction. Percentages under this section shall be determined in accordance with the United States generally accepted accounting principles and as of the date of Allergan's most recent publicly filed consolidated balance sheet prior to the date of entry into the sale or transfer agreement at issue.
This Section XVLS.3 shall be enforceable solely by the Enforcement Committee, and any objection under this Section X.VI.S.3 not raised within twenty (20) calendar days from the date that Allergan transmits notice of the transaction to the Enforcement Committee is waived. Any dispute under this Section XVI.S.3 shall be a National Dispute as described in Section XIV.G and must be raised exclusively with the National Arbitration Panel as described therein within twenty (20) calendar days of the announcement, and the sole remedy shall be an order enjoining the transaction.
T. Modification, Amendment, Alteration. After the Reference Date, any modification, amendment, or alteration of this Agreement by the Parties shall be binding only if evidenced in writing signed by Allergan along with the signatures of at least thirty-seven (37) of those then -serving Attorneys General of the Settling States along with a representation from each Attorney General that either: (1) the advisory committee or similar entity established or recognized by that Settling State (either pursuant to subsection VIILF.2, by a State -Subdivision Agreement, or by statute) voted in favor of the modification, amendment, or alteration of this Agreement including at least one Participating Subdivision -appointed member; or (2) in States without any advisory committee, that 50.1% of the Participating Subdivisions by population expressed approval of the modification, amendment, or alteration of this Agreement in writing. Provided, however, in the event the modification, amendment, or alteration relates to injunctive relief, interstate allocation between the Settling States, intrastate allocation in a particular Settling State, or fees or costs of Settling States and Participating Subdivisions, then every Settling 65 December 20, 2022
State and each Participating Subdivision affected by that modification, amendment, or alteration must assent in writing. Provided further that, in the event the modification, amendment, or alteration relates to injunctive relief, then such amendment, modification, or alteration of injunctive relief against Allergan will not be effective unless and until any Consent Judgment is modified by a court of competent jurisdiction, except as otherwise provided by the Injunctive Terms.
U. Termination.
Unless otherwise agreed to by Allergan and the Settling State in question, this Agreement and all of its terms (except subsection XVI.O and any other non - admissibility provisions, which shall continue in full force and effect) shall be canceled and terminated with respect to the Settling State, and the Agreement and all orders issued by the courts in the Settling State pursuant to the Agreement shall become null and void and of no effect if one or more of the following conditions applies:
a. A Consent Judgment approving this Agreement without modification of any of the Agreement's terms has not been entered as to the Settling State by a court of competent jurisdiction on or before one hundred eighty (180) days after the Effective Date; or
b. This Agreement or the Consent Judgment as to that Settling State has been disapproved by a court of competent jurisdiction to which it was presented for approval and/or entry (or, in the event of an appeal from or review of a decision of such a court to approve this Agreement and the Consent Judgment, by the court hearing such appeal or conducting such review), and the time to appeal from such disapproval has expired, or, in the event of an appeal from such disapproval, the appeal has been dismissed or the disapproval has been affirmed by the court of last resort to which such appeal has been taken and such dismissal or disapproval has become no longer subject to further appeal (including, without limitation, review by the United States Supreme Court).
2. If this Agreement is terminated with respect to a Settling State and its Participating Subdivisions for whatever reason pursuant to subsection XVLU.1, then:
a. An applicable statute of limitation or any similar time requirement (excluding any statute of repose) shall be tolled from the date the Settling State signed this Agreement until the later of the time permitted by applicable law or for one year from the date of such termination, with the effect that Allergan and the Settling State in question shall be in the same position with respect to the statute of limitation as they were at the time the Settling State filed its action; and
b. Allergan and the Settling State and its Participating Subdivisions in question shall jointly move the relevant court of competent jurisdiction for an order 66 December 20, 2022
reinstating the actions and Claims dismissed pursuant to the terms of this Agreement governing dismissal, with the effect that Allergan and the Settling State and its Participating Subdivisions in question shall be in the same position with respect to those actions and Claims as they were at the time the action or Claim was stayed or dismissed.
3. Unless Allergan and the Enforcement Committee agree otherwise, this Agreement, with the exception of the Injunctive Relief Terms that have their own provisions on duration, shall terminate as to all Parties as of Annual Payment 6, provided that Allergan has performed its payment obligations under the Agreement as of that date. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, all releases under this Agreement will remain effective despite any termination under this paragraph.
V. Waiver. Allergan, for good and valuable consideration the receipt of which is acknowledged, hereby (a) waives, foregoes and relinquishes all rights to utilize and/or seek relief under any of the following laws of the State of Texas for the restructuring of its debts or liabilities related to Released Claims or Claims that would have been Released Claims if they had been brought by a Releasor against a Released Entity before the Effective Date, or this Agreement: Tex. Bus. Orgs. Code § 10.003 (Contents of Plan of Merger: More Than One Successor) or any other statute of Subchapter A of Chapter 10 of Tex. Bus. Orgs. Code to the extent such statute relates to multi -successor or divisive mergers (and/or any other similar laws or statutes in any other state or territory); Tex. Bus. Orgs. Code § § 11.01-
11.414 (Winding Up and Termination of Domestic Entity); or Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §§
23.01-23.33 (Assignments for the Benefit of Creditors) (collectively, the "Texas Statutes"), and (b) agrees, warrants and represents that it will not file, request or petition for relief under the Texas Statutes related to its debts or liabilities related to Released Claims or Claims that would have been Released Claims if they had been brought by a Releasor against a Released Entity before the Effective Date, or this Agreement, in each case until such time as all of Allergan's payment obligations incurred hereunder are satisfied in full. The foregoing waiver and relinquishment includes, without limitation, until such time as all of Allergan's payment obligations hereunder are satisfied in full, Allergan's rights to execute a divisional merger or equivalent transaction or restructuring related to its debts or liabilities related to Released Claims or Claims that would have been Released Claims if they had been brought by a Releasor against a Released Entity before the Effective Date, or this Agreement that in each case has the intent or foreseeable effect of (i) separating material assets from material liabilities and (ii) assigning or allocating all or a substantial portion of those liabilities to any subsidiary or affiliate that files for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, or pursuant to which such subsidiary or affiliate that files for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code would be assuming or retaining all or a substantial portion of those liabilities.
W. Governing Law. Except (1) as otherwise provided in the Agreement or (2) as necessary, in the sole judgment of the National Arbitration Panel, to promote uniformity of interpretation for matters within the scope of the National Arbitration Panel's authority, this Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the respective laws of the Settling State, without regard to the conflict of law rules of such Settling State, that is seeking to enforce the Agreement against Allergan or against which Allergan is seeking enforcement. 67 December 20, 2022
Notwithstanding any other provision in this subsection on governing law, any disputes relating to the Settlement Fund Escrow shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the law of the state where the escrow agent has its primary place of business.
December 20, 2022
ALLERGAN PUBLIC GLOBAL OPIOID SETTLEMENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT A Alleged Harms..................................................................................................... A-1 EXHIBIT B Enforcement Committee Organizational Bylaws ............................................. B-1 EXHIBIT C Litigating Subdivisions and Special Districts List ........................................... C-I EXHIBIT D [Intentionally Omitted]....................................................................................... D-1 EXHIBIT E List of Opioid Remediation Uses....................................................................... E-1 EXHIBIT F-1 List of States and Pre -Credit Overall Allocation Percentages ......................F-1 EXHIBIT F-2 List of Eligible Settling States and Overall Allocation Percentages .............F-3 EXHIBIT G Subdivisions and Special Districts Eligible to Receive Direct Allocations from the Subdivision Fund and Subdivision Fund Allocation Percentages................................................................................................................................ G-1 EXHIBIT H [Intentionally Omitted]...................................................................................... H-1 EXHIBIT I Subdivisions with a Population Greater than 10,000......................................... I-1 EXHIBIT J-1 AbbVie Entities..................................................................................................J-1 EXHIBIT J-2 Allergan Entities................................................................................................ J-2 EXHIBIT J-3 Divested Entities................................................................................................ J-3 EXHIBIT K Subdivision and Special District Settlement Participation Form .................. K-I EXHIBIT L Settlement Fund Administrator......................................................................... L-1 EXHIBIT M-1 Payment Schedule
ris
EXHIBIT M-2 Payment Schedule for Fee Funds, Cost Funds, and Additional Restitution................................................................................................................................. M-2 EXHIBIT N Additional Restitution Amount Allocation....................................................... N-1 EXHIBIT O Adoption of a State -Subdivision Agreement....................................................0-1.
EXHIBIT P Injunctive Relief...................................................................................................P-1 EXHIBIT Q [Intentionally Omitted]...................................................................................... Q-1
EXHIBIT R Agreement on Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and Expenses ...................................... R-1 EXHIBIT S Agreement on the State Outside Counsel Fee Fund for Manufacturer Settlements.................................................................................................................................. S-1 EXHIBIT T Agreement on the State Cost Fund Administration ........................................ T-1 ii
EXHIBIT A
Alleged Harms
The following export reports that were filed in connection with the case captioned In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation, No. 1:17-and-02804 (N.D. Ohio):
1. Expert report of Professor David Cutler, dated March 25, 2019.
2. Expert report of Dr. Jeffrey B. Liebman, dated March 25, 2019.
3. Expert report of Professor Thomas McGuire regarding damages to Bellwethers, dated March 25, 2019.
4. Report of Professor Thomas McGuire regarding public nuisance, dated March 25, 2019.
A-1
EXHIBIT B
Enforcement Committee Organizational Bylaws
ARTICLE I
These bylaws constitute the code of rules adopted by the Settling States and Participating Subdivisions for the creation of an Enforcement Committee (the "Committee") to exist and operate during the term of the Agreement in connection with Allergan and shall control the regulation and management of the Committee's affairs.
ARTICLE H
Purpose
The Committee is organized for the sole purpose of evaluating and taking such action as deemed reasonable, necessary, and appropriate by the members of the Committee on the matters delegated to the Committee under that certain Settlement Agreement between the Settling States and Allergan, dated November , 2022.
(1) Number of Members
(2)
ARTICLE III
Members of the Committee
The Committee will consist of thirteen (13) members (the "Members"). Upon majority resolution of the Committee, the number of Members may be increased or decreased from time to time, but in no event shall a decrease have the effect of decreasing the total number of Members to less than seven Members.
Initial Members
The Committee initially will consist of eight (8) Settling State Members and five (5) Participating Subdivision Members; two (2) of the Participating Subdivisions shall be counties and two (2) shall be municipalities, and the fifth Participating Subdivision member may be either a county or a municipality. The initial Settling State Members are representatives from: California, Illinois, Iowa, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Virginia. The initial Participating Subdivision Members are: [•]. Until the date fifteen (15) months from the Effective Date contained in the Settlement Agreement, the Participating Subdivisions may designate their outside counsel to serve as their representative. After the date fifteen (15) months from the Effective Date, an employee or official of the Participating Subdivision must be the designated as the representative of the Participating Subdivision.
(3) Term of Members
KIN
The term of office for Members of the Committee will be until the end of the term of the Settlement Agreement, six (6) years, unless and until a Member withdraws or resigns from the Committee.
(4) Resignation
Any Member may resign at any time by delivering written notice to the Chairperson of the Committee. Such resignation shall take effect upon receipt or, if later, at the time specified in the notice.
(5) Removal
(a) Any Member may be removed without cause, at any time, by a majority of the entire Committee, at a Regular or Special Meeting called for that purpose. Any Member under consideration of removal must first be notified about the consideration by written notice at least five days prior to the meeting at which the vote takes place. (b) In the event that any Member is not a Settling State or a Participating Subdivision or the Member subsequently becomes a Later Litigating Subdivision, the Member shall be removed immediately without notice or vote of the Committee. (6) Vacancies
In the event of a vacancy, the Members of the same type (Settling State or Participating Subdivision) shall select another Settling State or Participating Subdivision to fill that Member's position.
(7) Compensation
Members shall not receive any salaries or other compensation for their services, but, by resolution of the Committee, may be reimbursed for any actual expenses incurred in the performance of their duties for the Committee, as long as a majority of disinterested Members approve the reimbursement. Any reimbursement shall be sought from the Settlement Fund Administrator.
ARTICLE IV
Conflicts of Interest and Code of Ethics
If a Member, agent, or employee of the Committee has a conflict of interest, he or she may not participate in a vote, discussion, or decision about the matter. Each Member shall follow any applicable state or local law with respect to conflicts, gifts, and ethics.
Committee Meetings
(1) Place of Meetings
Meetings of the Committee will be held at any place that the Chairperson may designate, including by telephonic or electronic means.
(2) Regular Meetings
Regular meetings of the Committee shall be held as deemed necessary by the Chairperson or any three members.
(3) Notice of Meetings
Written notice of the date, time, place and subject of each meeting must be provided to the Members at least 72 hours before the scheduled time of the meeting, except when there is an emergency or urgent public necessity.
(4) Quorum
A majority of the incumbent Members (not counting vacancies) shall constitute a quorum for the purposes of convening a meeting or conducting business. (5) Voting and Proxy
When it is necessary to vote on any matter before the Committee, Members may vote by electronic means as provided in these Bylaws. Proxy voting is permitted. In order for a matter to pass, the matter must have a majority vote of Members present and must have at least one vote from a Settling State Member and a Participating Subdivision Member. In the event that there is a Quorum, but no Settling State or Participating Subdivision Member is present, then a matter may pass with a simple majority vote. (6) Minutes
The Committee shall prepare and keep minutes. The minutes must state the subject of each deliberation and indicate each vote, order, decision, or other action taken.
ARTICLE VI
Officers
(1) Roster of Officers
The Committee shall have a Chairperson, a Vice Chairperson, and a Secretary. The Committee may have at its discretion, such other officers as may be appointed by the Members of the Committee. One person may hold two or more offices, except those serving as Chairperson.
(2) Election and Removal of Officers
All officers shall serve two-year terms. The election shall be conducted at the first meeting of the fiscal year. Officers shall remain in office until their successors have been selected.
Officers may serve consecutive terms without limit. The election of officers shall be by majority vote of the Members of the Committee attending the meeting. (3) Vacancies
If a vacancy occurs during the term of office for any elected officer, the Members of the Committee shall elect a new officer to fill the remainder of the term as soon as practical, by majority vote of Members present.
(4) Chairperson
The Chairperson will supervise and control the affairs of the Committee and shall exercise such supervisory powers as may be given him/her by the Members of the Committee. The Chairperson will perform all duties incident to such office and such other duties as may be provided in these bylaws or as may be prescribed from time to time by the Committee. The Chairperson shall preside at all meetings and shall exercise parliamentary control in accordance with Robert's Rules of Order.
(5) Vice Chairperson
The Vice Chairperson shall act in place of the Chairperson in the event of the Chairperson's absence, inability, or refusal to act, and shall exercise and discharge such other duties as may be required by the Committee. The Vice Chairperson shall serve as the parliamentarian and interpret any ambiguities of the bylaws. (6) Secretary
The Secretary will keep and maintain all records related to the Committee and take minutes of all meetings.
(7) Records
All elected officers and committee chairpersons shall relinquish their records to the Chairperson immediately upon the completion of their term of office or completion of a project.
(8) Resignation
An officer may resign the office while not resigning membership from the Committee, by submitting a letter to the Chairperson. Vacancies occurring in any office shall be appointed for the remainder of the term.
ARTICLE VII
Duties
(1) Prior to the Reference Date
The Committee shall be responsible for
including, but not limited to, negotiating
Settlement Agreement.
(2) After the Effective Date
any additional negotiations with Allergan,
extensions of any periods created by the
The Committee shall establish procedures for the receipt of notices that a dispute exists concerning the Agreement and review of such disputes, pursuant to Section XIV of the Agreement. Members may engage with Allergan, Settling States, and Participating Subdivisions attempting to resolve any dispute without further action by the Committee.
The Committee may request additional information from Allergan, Settling States, and Participating Subdivisions to the extent the Committee believes such information is necessary to understand, resolve, or provide advice related to a dispute. The Committee shall endeavor to provide advice relative to the dispute no later than 60 days after receipt of notice.
ARTICLE VIII
Rules of Procedure
The proceedings and business of the Committee shall be governed by Robert's Rules of Order unless otherwise waived by the Committee.
ARTICLE IX
Operations
(1) Records
The Committee will keep correct and complete records and will also keep minutes of the proceedings of the Committee meetings and Committees. The Committee will keep such records at its principal place of business at a place designated by the Chairperson.
All elected officers and committee chairpersons shall relinquish their records to the Chairperson, immediately upon the completion of their term of office. (2) Inspection of Books and Records
The minutes of a meeting are public records and shall be available for public inspection and copying on request to the Committee's Chairperson or the Chairperson's designee. (3) Amendments
The bylaws may be amended at any time by a vote of a majority of Members present and must have at least one vote from a Settling State Member and a Participating Subdivision
Member. In the event that there is a Quorum, but no Settling State or Participating Subdivision Member is present, then a matter may pass with a simple majority vote.
EXHIBIT C
Litigating Subdivisions and Special Districts List'
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
The Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville DIBIA HH Health System; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville DIBIA Huntsville Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville DIBIA Madison Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville DIBIA Huntsville Hospital for
Attentus Moulton,
Women and Children; HHHealth System -
AL
LLC d/b/a Lawrence
Morgan, LLC DIBIA Decatur Morgan
1:19-op-45143
N.D. Ohio
Medical Center
Hospital - Decatur And Decatur Morgan
(Federal)
Hospital - Parkway; The Health Care
Authority Of Morgan County - City Of
Decatur; HHHealth System -Shoals, LLC
DIBIA Helen Keller Hospital and Red Bay
Hospital; HH Health System -Athens
Limestone, LLC DIBIA Athens Limestone
Hospital; Attentus Moulton, LLC DIBIA
Lawrence Medical Center v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Fort Payne Hospital Corporation; The
Bibb County Healthcare Authority; The
Dale County Health Care Authority;
Greene County Hospital Board; Jackson
Hospital & Clinic, Inc.; Escambia County
Alabama Community Hospitals, Inc.;
Mizell Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The
Tombigbee Health Care Authority;
Geneva County Health Care Authority;
Community Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga
Health Care Authority; Russellville
AL -Circuit
Bibb County
Hospital, Inc.; Lakeland Community
Court of
Co
AL
Healthcare
Hospital, Inc.; Monroe County
CV-2021-
h
Authority d/b/a Bibb
Healthcare Authority; Infirmary Health
900016
County
Medical Center
Hospitals, Inc.; The DCH Health Care
(State)
Authority; The Healthcare Authority For
Baptist Health, An Affiliate Of UAB
Health System; Medical West Hospital
Authority, An Affiliate Of UAB Health
System; Evergreen Medical Center; LLC,•
Gilliard Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad QfAlabama,
LLC; QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Affinity
Hospital, LLC, Gadsden Regional
Medical Center, LLC,- Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authori
This list is subject to amendment in the event it proves to be incomplete and other entities that satisfy the definition for "Litigating Subdivision" or "Litigating Special District" are subsequently identified.
C-1
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Of Clarke County, Alabama; BBHPBMC,
LLC; BBH, WBMC, LLC, BBH SBMC,
LLC; BBH CBMC, LLC and BBH BMC,
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
AL
City of Abbeville
City of Abbeville, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45437
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Alabaster, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Alabaster
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:22-op-45013
(Federal)
al.
Marshall County; the Cities of Albertville,
AL
City of Albertville
Arab, Boaz and Guntersville; and the
1:18-op-45230
N.D. Ohio
Towns ofDouglas and Grant, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
City of Alexander
City of Alexander City, Alabama v.
1:19-op-45827
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Marshall County; the Cities of Albertville,
AL
City of Arab
Arab, Boaz and Guntersville; and the
1:18-op-45230
N.D. Ohio
Towns ofDouglas and Grant, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
City of Argo
City ofArgo v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45744
N.D. Ohio
Federal
AL
City of Ashland
City ofAshland, Alabama v. Teva
1:19-op-46102
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Leesburg, City of Jacksonville,
City of Rainbow City, City of Ashville,
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Ashville
City of Springville, City of Moody, City of
1:20-op-45261
(Federal)
Ragland and City of Thomasville v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
City of Athens
City ofAthens, Alabama v. Teva
1:19-op-45953
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
City of Fultondale, City of Graysville,
City of Centre, Town of Cedar Bluff, City
AL
City of Attalla
of Dadeville, Town of Camp Hill, Town of
1:20-op-45265
N.D. Ohio
Oakman, City ofAttalla and Town of
(Federal)
Gilbertown, Alabama v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
City of Auburn
City ofAuburn, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45282
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Bay Minette, Alabama; Town of
Loxley, Alabama; and Town of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Bay Minette
Summerdale, Alabama v.
1:22-op-45018
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
The City of Bessemer, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Bessemer
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:22-op-45014
(Federal)
al.
AL
City of Birmingham
City of Birmingham v. Purdue Pharma
1:17-op-45008
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
Marshall County; the Cities of Albertville,
AL
City of Boaz
Arab, Boaz and Guntersville; and the
1:18-op-45230
N.D. Ohio
Towns ofDouglas and Grant, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
C-2
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
AL
City of Brent
City of Brent, Alabama v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45910
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Brewton, Alabama, and City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Brewton
Semmes, Alabama v. Teva
1:21-op-45113
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Jackson County, City of Bridgeport, City
of Henagar, City of New Hope, City of
AL
City of Bridgeport
Scottsboro, Town of Geraldine and Town
1: 1 8-op-45634
N.D. Ohio
of Woodville, Alabama v.
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
AL
City of Brundidge
City of Brundidge, Alabama v. Teva
1:19-o-46128
p
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Calera, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Calera
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:21-op-45070
(Federal)
al.
The City of Nauvoo, The City of Cordova,
The City of Carbon Hill, The City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Carbon Hill
Sipsey, The City of Parrish and The City
1: 1 8-op-45737
(Federal)
of Oakman, Alabama v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
AL
City of Center Point
City of Center Point, Alabama v. Teva
1:19-op-46103
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Fultondale, City of Graysville,
City of Centre, Town of Cedar Bluff, City
AL
City of Centre
of Dadeville, Town of Camp Hill, Town of
1:20-op-45265
N.D. Ohio
Oakman, City ofAttalla and Town of
(Federal)
Gilbertown, Alabama v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
City of Centreville
City of Centreville, Alabama v. Teva
1:19-op-46120
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
AL
City of Chickasaw
City of Chickasaw, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45115
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
City of Childersburg, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Childersburg
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:22-op-45020
(Federal)
al.
City of Clanton, Alabama v.
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al. / The City of Clanton, Alabama; The
1:18-op-46084 /
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Clanton
City of Columbiana, Alabama; The City of
1:22-op-45016
(Federal)
Helena, Alabama; The City of Pelham,
Alabama v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
Corporation, et al.
The City of Clanton, Alabama; The City
of Columbiana, Alabama; The City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Columbiana
Helena, Alabama; The City ofPelham,
1:22-op-45016
(Federal)
Alabama v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
Corporation, et al.
The City of Nauvoo, The City of Cordova,
The City of Carbon Hill, The City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Cordova
Sipsey, The City of Parrish and The City
1:18-op-45737
(Federal)
of Oakman, Alabama v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
C-3
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
City of Cullman, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Cullman
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45248
(Federal)
al.
City of Dadeville, Alabama v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al. / City of Fultondale,
City of Graysville, City of Centre, Town of
1:19-op-45779 /
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Dadeville
Cedar Bluff, City of Dadeville, Town of
1:20-op-45265
(Federal)
Camp Hill, Town of Oakman, City of
Attalla and Town of Gilbertown, Alabama
v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
City of Daleville
City of Daleville, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45778
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Daphne
City of Daphne, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45227
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Decatur, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Decatur
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45201
(Federal)
al.
City of Demopolis, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Demopolis
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45183
(Federal)
al.
The Counties of Marion, Pickens and
AL
City of Dora
Walker, Alabama and the Cities of Dora,
1:18-op-45171
N.D. Ohio
Jasper, and Sumiton, Alabama v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
City of Dothan
City of Dothan, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45886
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
City of East
City of East Brewton, Alabama v. Teva
1:22-op-45005
N.D. Ohio
Brewton
Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Enterprise, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
Al
City of Enterprise
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45213
(Federal)
al.
AL
City of Eufaula
City of Eufaula v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:19-op-46132
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
AL
City of Evergreen
City of Evergreen, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45422
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
AL
City of Fairfield
City offairfield, eld, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45089
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
AL
City of Fairhope
City of Fairhope, Alabama v. Teva
1:22-op-45002
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
Fayette County, City of Fayette, Town of
AL
City of Fayette
Berry and Rodney Ingle, in his capacity
1:18-op-45211
N.D. Ohio
as Sheriff of Fayette County, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
City of Florence
The City of Florence v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45073
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Foley
City of Foley, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45287
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Fort Payne, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Fort Payne
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45079
(Federal)
al.
City of Fultondale, City of Graysville,
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Fultondale
City of Centre, Town of Cedar Bluff, City
'Dadeville,
1:20-op-45265
(Federal)
o Town of Camp Hill, Town o
C-4
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Oakman, City ofAttalla and Town of
Gilbertown, Alabama v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City of Gadsden, Etowah County, and
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Gadsden
Todd Entrekin, Sheriff of Etowah County,
1: 1 7-op-45 101
(Federal)
Alabama v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
City of Geneva
City of Geneva, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45986
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Georgiana
City of Georgiana, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45436
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Fultondale, City of Graysville,
City of Centre, Town of Cedar Bluff, City
AL
City of Graysville
of Dadeville, Town of Camp Hill, Town of
1:20-op-45265
N.D. Ohio
Oakman, City ofAttalla and Town of
(Federal)
Gilbertown, Alabama v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
City of Greensboro
City of Greensboro, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45421
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Greenville
City of Greenville, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45023
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Guin, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Guin
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45457
(Federal)
al.
The City of Gulf Shores, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Gulf Shores
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:22-op-45019
(Federal)
al.
Marshall County; the Cities of Albertville,
AL
City of Guntersville
Arab, Boaz and Guntersville; and the
1:18-op-45230
N.D. Ohio
Towns ofDouglas and Grant, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
City of Haleyville
City of Haleyville, Alabama v. Teva
1:19-op-46118
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
City of Hamilton, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Hamilton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45564
(Federal)
al.
City of Hartselle, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Hartselle
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45736
(Federal)
al.
AL
City of Headland
City of Headland, Alabama v. Teva
1:19-op-46131
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
The City of Clanton, Alabama; The City
of Columbiana, Alabama; The City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Helena
Helena, Alabama; The City of Pelham,
1:22-op-45016
(Federal)
Alabama v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
Corporation, et al.
Jackson County, City of'Bridgeport, City
of Henagar, City of New Hope, City of
AL
City of Henagar
Scottsboro, Town of Geraldine and Town
1:18-op-45634
N.D. Ohio
of Woodville, Alabama v.
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
AL
City of Homewood
City of Homewood, Alabama v. McKesson
1: 1 9-op-45973
N.D. Ohio
Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
C-5
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
AL
City of Hoover
City of Hoover, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45746
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Jefferson County, Jefferson County Board
of Health, City of Pleasant Grove, City of
AL
City of Hueytown
Hueytown and City of Mountain Brook
1: 1 8-op-45558
N.D. Ohio
and Mike Hale, in his capacity as Sheriff
(Federal)
of Jefferson County, Alabama v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
City of Huntsville
City of Huntsville, Alabama v. Teva
1:19-op-45947
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City oflrondale, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Irondale
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:22-op-45012
(Federal)
al.
City of Leesburg, City of Jacksonville,
City ofRainbow City, City of Ashville,
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Jacksonville
City of Springville, City of Moody, City of
1:20-op-45261
(Federal)
Ragland and City of Thomasville v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
The Counties of'Marion, Pickens and
AL
City of Jasper
Walker, Alabama and the Cities of Dora,
1:18-op-45171
N.D. Ohio
Jasper, Sumiton, Alabama v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
City of Killen
The City of Killen, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45218
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Lanett
City of Lanett, Alabama v. Teva
1:19-op-46130
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Leeds
City of Leeds, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45088
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Leesburg, City of Jacksonville,
City ofRainbow City, City of Ashville,
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Leesburg
City of Springville, City of Moody, City of
1:20-op-45261
(Federal)
Ragland and City of Thomasville v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
City of Level Plains
City of Level Plains, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45100
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
AL
City of Lincoln
City ofLincoln, Alabama v. Cardinal
1:1.8-op-45786
N.D. Ohio
Health, Inc., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Linden
City of Linden v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45118
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Louisville
The City of Louisville, Alabama v. Teva
1:19-op-46058
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Luverne
City ofLuverne, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45109
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Madison
The City of Madison, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45198
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City ofMarion, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Marion
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45217
(Federal)
al.
AL
City of Midfield
City of Midfield, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45416
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City ofMillbrook, Alabama and City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Millbrook
Wetumpka, Alabama v. Teva
1:21-op-45135
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
C-6
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
City ofMobile, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Mobile
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45076
(Federal)
al.
Monroe County, Alabama; The City of
AL
City of Monroeville
Monroeville, Alabama v.
1:20-op-45273
N.D. Ohio
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
AL
City of Montgomery
City of Montgomery, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45494
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Leesburg, City of Jacksonville,
City ofRainbow City, City of Ashville,
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Moody
City of Springville, City of Moody, City of
1:20-op-45261
(Federal)
Ragland and City of Thomasville v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City ofMoulton, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Moulton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45202
(Federal)
al.
Jefferson County, Jefferson County Board
of Health, City of Pleasant Grove, City of
AL
City of Mountain
Hueytown and City of Mountain Brook
1:18-op-45558
N.D. Ohio
Brook
and Mike Hale, in his capacity as Sheriff
(Federal)
of Jefferson County, Alabama v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
City of Muscle
The City of Muscle Shoals, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
Shoals
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:20-op-45268
(Federal)
The City of Nauvoo, The City of Cordova,
The City of Carbon Hill, The City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Nauvoo
Sipsey, The City of Parrish and The City
1:18-op-45737
(Federal)
of Oakman, Alabama v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Jackson County, City of Bridgeport, City
of Henagar, City of New Hope, City of
AL
City of New Hope
Scottsboro, Town of Geraldine and Town
1:1.8-op-45634
N.D. Ohio
of Woodville, Alabama v.
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
City of Northport, City of Robertsdale and
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Northport
Town of Brookwood, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45272
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
The City of Nauvoo, The City of Cordova,
The City of Carbon Hill, The City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Oakman
Sipsey, The City of Parrish and The City
1:18-op-45737
(Federal)
of Oakman, Alabama v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
AL
City of Oneonta
The City of Oneonta, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45210
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Opelika, City of Spanish Fort, City
AL
City of Opelika
of Centreville, City of Slocomb and Town
1:20-op-45208
N.D. Ohio
of West Blocton v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
(Federal)
USA, Inc., et al.
C-7
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
City of Opp, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Opp
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45011
(Federal)
al.
AL
City of Orange
City of Orange Beach, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45784
N.D. Ohio
Beach
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Oxford
City of Oxford, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45774
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Ozark, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Ozark
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45214
(Federal)
al.
The City of Nauvoo, The City of Cordova,
The City of Carbon Hill, The City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Parrish
Sipsey, The City of Parrish and The City
1:18-op-45737
(Federal)
of Oakman, Alabama v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
The City of Clanton, Alabama; The City
of Columbiana, Alabama; The City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Pelham
Helena, Alabama; The City of Pelham,
1:22-op-45016
(Federal)
Alabama v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
Corporation, et al.
AL
City of Pell City
City of Pell City, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45091
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
Phenix City, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Phenix
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45179
(Federal)
al.
AL
City of Piedmont
City of Piedmont v. AmerisourceBergen
21-op-45049
N.D. Ohio
Dru Cor oration, et al.
Federal
Jefferson County, Jefferson County Board
of Health, City of Pleasant Grove, City of
AL
City of Pleasant
Hueytown and City of Mountain Brook
1:18-op-45558
N.D. Ohio
Grove
and Mike Hale, in his capacity as Sheriff
(Federal)
of Jefferson County, Alabama v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
City of Prattville
City of Prattville, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45783
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
AL
City of Prichard
City of Prichard, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45690
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Leesburg, City of Jacksonville,
City ofRainbow City, City ofAshville,
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Ragland
City of Springville, City of Moody, City of
1:20-op-45261
(Federal)
Ragland and City of Thomasville v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City of Leesburg, City of Jacksonville,
City of Rainbow
City of Rainbow City, City of Ashville,
N.D. Ohio
AL
city
y
Cityo Springville, Ci o Mood , City o
f City f y ty f
1:20-0 45261
p
Federal
(Federal)
Ragland and City of Thomasville v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City of Rainsville and Town of
AL
City of Rainsville
Hammondville, Alabama v.
1:19-op-45135
N.D. Ohio
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
AL
City of Red Bay
City of Red Bay, City of Russellville, City
1:19-op-45136
N.D. Ohio
of Sheffield and Town of Leighton,
Federal
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Alabama v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
Corporation, et al.
AL
City of Roanoke
City of Roanoke, Alabama v. Teva
22-op-45011
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Northport, City of Robertsdale and
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Robertsdale
Town of Brookwood, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45272
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City of Red Bay, City of Russellville, City
AL
City of Russellville
of Sheffield and Town of'Leighton,
1:19-op-45136
N.D. Ohio
Alabama v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Cor oration, et al.
AL
City of Saraland
City of Saraland, Alabama v. Teva
22-op-45017
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Satsuma
City of Satsuma, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45116
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
Jackson County, City of Bridgeport, City
of Henagar, City of New Hope, City of
AL
City of Scottsboro
Scottsboro, Town of Geraldine and Town
1:18-op-45634
N.D. Ohio
of Woodville, Alabama v.
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
City of Selma, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Selma
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45198
(Federal)
al.
City of Brewton, Alabama, and City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Semmes
Semmes, Alabama v. Teva
1:21-op-45113
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City of Red Bay, City of Russellville, City
AL
City of Sheffield
of Sheffield and Town of Leighton,
1:19-op-45136
N.D. Ohio
Alabama v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
The City of Nauvoo, The City of Cordova,
The City of Carbon Hill, The City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Sipsey
Sipsey, The City of Parrish and The City
1:18-op-45737
(Federal)
of Oakman, Alabama v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
City of Opelika, City of Spanish Fort, City
AL
City of Slocomb
of Centreville, City of Slocomb and Town
1:20-op-45208
N.D. Ohio
of West Blocton v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
(Federal)
USA, Inc., et al.
City of Opelika, City of Spanish Fort, City
AL
City of Spanish Fort
of Centreville, City of Slocomb and Town
1:20-op-45208
N.D. Ohio
of West Blocton v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
(Federal)
USA, Inc., et al.
City of Leesburg City of Jacksonville,
City ofRainbow City, City of Ashville,
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Springville
City of Springville, City of Moody, City of
1:20-op-45261
(Federal)
Ragland and City of Thomasville v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
The Counties of Marion, Pickens and
AL
City of Sumiton
Walker, Alabama and the Cities of Dora,
1:18-op-45171
N.D. Ohio
Jasper Sumiton, Alabama v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
C-9
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
AL
City of Sylacauga
City of Sylacauga, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45900
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
City of Talladega
Talladega County and City of Talladega,
1:18-op-45190
N.D. Ohio
Alabama v. Cardinal Health, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Leesburg, City of Jacksonville,
City ofRainbow City, City of Ashville,
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Thomasville
City of Springville, City of Moody, City of
1:20-op-45261
(Federal)
Ragland and City of Thomasville v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City of Troy, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Troy
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45947
(Federal)
al.
AL
City of Trussville
The City of Trussville, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45192
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Tuscaloosa, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Tuscaloosa
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45553
(Federal)
al.
The Town of Cherokee and the City of
AL
City of Tuscumbia
Tuscumbia, Alabama, and the Counties of
1:18-op-45005
N.D. Ohio
Colbert and Franklin, Alabama v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
City of Tuskegee
City of Tuskegee, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45544
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Union
City of Union Springs, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
Springs
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45204
(Federal)
AL
City of Uniontown
City of Uniontown, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45117
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
Lamar County, Alabama, City of Vernon,
AL
City of Vernon
Alabama and Hal Allred, in his capacity
1:18-op-45210
N.D. Ohio
as Sheriff of Lamar County, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
City of Vestavia
City of Vestavia Hills, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
Hills
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45141
(Federal)
AL
City of Weaver
City of Weaver, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45565
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
City ofMillbrook, Alabama and City of
N.D. Ohio
AL
City of Wetumpka
Wetumpka, Alabama v. Teva
1:21-op-45135
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
City of Winfield
The City of Winfield, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45738
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
County of Autauga
Autauga County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45086
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
AL
County of Babour
Babour County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45244
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al
Federal
Baldwin County, Alabama, v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Baldwin
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45152
(Federal)
al.
Bibb County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Bibb
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45413
(Federal)
al.
C-10
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
AL
County of Blount
Blount County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45415
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
Bullock County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Bullock
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45246
(Federal)
al.
AL
County of Butler
Butler County, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45441
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
County of Calhoun
Calhoun County, Alabama v. Cardinal
1:18-op-45191
N.D. Ohio
Health, Inc., et al.
Federal
AL
County of Chambers
Chambers County, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45408
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Cherokee County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Cherokee
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45207
(Federal)
al.
Chilton County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Chilton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45735
(Federal)
al.
AL
County of Choctaw
Choctaw County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45770
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Clarke County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Clarke
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45247
(Federal)
al.
AL
County of Clay
Clay County, Alabama v. Cardinal
1: 1 8-op-45248
N.D. Ohio
Health, Inc., et al.
Federal
AL
County of Cleburne
Cleburne County, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45566
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Coffee County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Coffee
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45182
(Federal)
al.
The Town of Cherokee and the City of
AL
County of Colbert
Tuscumbia, Alabama, and the Counties of
1:18-op-45005
N.D. Ohio
Colbert and Franklin, Alabama v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Conecuh County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Conecuh
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45957
(Federal)
al.
AL
County of Coosa
Coosa County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45995
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
AL
County of
Covington County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45751
N.D. Ohio
Covington
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
County of Crenshaw
Crenshaw County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45983
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Cullman County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Cullman
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45227
(Federal)
al.
AL
County of Dale
Dale County, Alabama v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45561
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
Dallas County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Dallas
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45667
(Federal)
al
Dekalb County and the Town of Powell,
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of DeKalb
Alabama v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:20-op-45209
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
C-11
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Elmore County, Alabama, and Randolph
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Elmore
County, Alabama v. Teva
1:22-op-45003
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
County of Escambia
Escambia County, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45112
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Gadsden, Etowah County, and
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Etowah
Todd Entrekin, Sheriff of Etowah County,
1: 1 7-op-45 101
(Federal)
Alabama v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Fayette County, City of Fayette, Town of
AL
County of Fayette
Berry and Rodney Ingle, in his capacity
1:18-op-45211
N.D. Ohio
as Sheriff of Fayette County, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
The Town of Cherokee and the City of
AL
County of Franklin
Tuscumbia, Alabama, and the Counties of
1:18-op-45005
N.D. Ohio
Colbert and Franklin, Alabama v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
County of Geneva
Geneva County, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45105
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
Greene County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Greene
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45209
(Federal)
al.
AL
County of Hale
Hale County, Alabama v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45420
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
County of Henry
Henry County, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45543
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
County of Houston
Houston County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45019
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Jackson County, City of Bridgeport, City
ofHenagar, City ofNew Hope, City of
AL
County of Jackson
Scottsboro, Town of Geraldine and Town
1:18-op-45634
N.D. Ohio
of Woodville, Alabama v.
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
Jefferson County, Jefferson County Board
of Health, City of Pleasant Grove, City of
AL
County of Jefferson
Hueytown and City of Mountain Brook
1:1.8-op-45558
N.D. Ohio
and Mike Hale, in his capacity as Sheri
(Federal)
of Jefferson County, Alabama v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Lamar County, Alabama, City of Vernon,
AL
County of Lamar
Alabama and Hal Allred, in his capacity
1:18-op-45210
N.D. Ohio
as Sheriff ofLamar County, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
County of
Lauderdale County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45845
N.D. Ohio
Lauderdale
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Lawrence County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Lawrence
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45228
(Federal)
al.
AL
County of
Limestone County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45328
N.D. Ohio
Limestone
Pharma L.P., et al
Federal
Lowndes County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Lowndes
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45203
(Federal)
al.
C-12
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
AL
County of Macon
Macon County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45982
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Madison County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Madison
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45006
(Federal)
al.
Marengo County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Marengo
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45188
(Federal)
al.
The Counties of Mar ion, Pickens and
AL
County of Marion
Walker; Alabama and the Cities of Dora,
1:18-op-45171
N.D. Ohio
Jasper, Sumiton, Alabama v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Marshall County; the Cities of Albertville,
AL
County of Marshall
Arab, Boaz and Guntersville; and the
1:18-op-45230
N.D. Ohio
Towns ofDouglas and Grant, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Mobile County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Mobile
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45186
(Federal)
al.
Monroe County, Alabama; The City of
AL
County of Monroe
Monroeville, Alabama v.
1:20-op-45273
N.D. Ohio
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
AL
County of
Montgomery County, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45445
N.D. Ohio
Montgomery
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Morgan County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Morgan
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45200
(Federal)
al.
AL
County of Perry
Perry County, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45158
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
The Counties of Marion, Pickens and
AL
County of Pickens
Walker, Alabama and the Cities of Dora,
1:18-op-45171
N.D. Ohio
Jasper, Sumiton, Alabama v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Pike County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Pike
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45803
(Federal)
al.
Elmore County, Alabama, and Randolph
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Randolph
County, Alabama v. Teva
1:22-op-45003
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
County of Russell
Russell County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45826
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
County of Shelby
Shelby County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45414
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
County of St. Clair
St. Clair County, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45614
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Sumter County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Sumter
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45194
(Federal)
al.
AL
County of Talladega
Talladega County and City of Talladega,
1:18-op 45190
N.D. Ohio
Alabama v. Cardinal Health, Inc., et al.
Federal
C-13
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County of
Tallapoosa County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
Tallapoosa
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation et
1:17-op-45097
(Federal)
County of
Tuscaloosa County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
Tuscaloosa
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45196
(Federal)
The Counties of Mar ion, Pickens and
AL
County of Walker
Walker; Alabama and the Cities of Dora,
1:18-op-45171
N.D. Ohio
Jasper, Sumiton, Alabama v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
County of
Washington County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
Washington
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45180
(Federal)
Wilcox County, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
County of Wilcox
AmerisoureeBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45181
(Federal)
al.
The Health Care Authority of Cullman
AL
Cullman Regional
County; Cullman Regional Medical
1:19-op-46059
N.D. Ohio
Medical Center, Inc.
Center; Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
(Federal)
USA, Inc., et al.
Fort Payne Hospital Corporation; The
Bibb County Healthcare Authority; The
Dale County Health Care Authority;
Greene County Hospital Board; Jackson
Hospital & Clinic, Inc.; Escambia County
Alabama Community Hospitals, Inc.;
Mizell Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The
Tombigbee Health Care Authority;
Geneva County Health Care Authority;
Community Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga
Health Care Authority; Russellville
Hospital, Inc.; Lakeland Community
Hospital, Inc.; Monroe County
-Circuit
Dale County Health
Healthcare Authority; Infirmary Health
CC o
Court of
AL
Care Authority d/b/a
Hospitals, Inc.; The DCHHealth Care
CV-2021-
Conecuh
Dale Medical Center
Authority; The Healthcare Authority For
900016
County
Baptist Health, An Affiliate Of UAB
(State)
Health System; Medical West Hospital
Authority An Affiliate Of UAB Health
System; Evergreen Medical Center LLC,•
Gilliard Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad OfAlabama,
LLC; QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Affinity
Hospital, LLC,- Gadsden Regional
Medical Center LLC,- Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authority
Of Clarke County, Alabama; BBH PBMC,
LLC; BBH, WBMC, LLC,- BBH SBMC,
LLC; BBH CBMC, LLC; and BBH BMC
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
DCH Health Care
The DCHHealth Care Authority, The
CV-2019-
AL - Circuit
AL
Authority
Healthcare Authority for Baptist Health,
000007 / CV-
Court of
an affiliate of UAB Health System,
2021-900016
Conecuh
C-14
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Medical West Hospital Authority, an
County
affiliate of Uab Health System, Evergreen
(State)
Medical Center, LLC, Gilliard Health
Services, Inc., Crest Wood Healthcare,
L.P., Triad ofAlabama, LLC, QHG of
Enterprise, Inc., Affinity Hospital, LLC,
Gadsden Regional Medical Center, LLC,
Foley Hospital Corporation, The Health
Care Authority Of Clarke County,
Alabama, BBHPBMC, LLC, BBH,
WBMC, LLC, BBH SB MC, LLC, BBH
CBMC, LLC, BBH BMC, LLC v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al. /FortPayne Hospital
Corporation; The Bibb County
Healthcare Authority; The Dale County
Health Care Authority; Greene County
Hospital Board; Jackson Hospital &
Clinic, Inc.; Escambia County Alabama
Community Hospitals, Inc.; Mizell
Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The Tombigbee
Health Care Authority; Geneva County
Health Care Authority; Community
Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga Health
Care Authority; Russellville Hospital,
Inc.; Lakeland Community Hospital, Inc.;
Monroe County Healthcare Authority;
Infirmary Health Hospitals, Inc.; The
DCH Health Care Authority; The
Healthcare Authority For Baptist Health,
AnAffiliate Qf UAB Health System;
Medical West Hospital Authority, An
Affiliate Of UAB Health System;
Evergreen Medical Center, LLC; Gilliard
Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad OfAlabama,
LLC; QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Affinity
Hospital, LLC,- Gadsden Regional
Medical Center; LLC,- Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authority
Qf Clarke County, Alabama; BBHPBMC,
LLC,- BBH, WBMC, LLC,- BBHPBMC;
LLC,- BBH CBMC, LLC,- and BBH BMC,
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
Fort Payne Hospital Corporation; The
Bibb County Healthcare Authority; The
Dale County Health Care Authority;
Geneva County
Greene County Hospital Board; Jackson
AL - Circuit
Health Care
Hospital & Clinic, Inc.; Escambia County
CV-2021-
Court of
AL
Authority d/b/a
Alabama Community Hospitals, Inc.;
900016
Conecuh
Wiregrass Medical
Mizell Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The
County
Center
Tombigbee Health Care Authority;
(State)
Geneva County Health Care Authority;
Community Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga
Health Care Authority; Russellville
C-15
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Hospital, Inc.; Lakeland Community
Hospital, Inc.; Monroe County
Healthcare Authority; Infirmary Health
Hospitals, Inc.; The DCH Health Care
Authority; The Healthcare Authority For
Baptist Health, An Affiliate Of UAB
Health System; Medical West Hospital
Authority, An Affiliate Of UAB Health
System; Evergreen Medical Center, LLC,•
Gilliard Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad OfAlabama,
LLC QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Affinity
Hospital, LLC,- Gadsden Regional
Medical Center, LLC,- Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authority
Of Clarke County, Alabama; BBH PBMC,
LLC; BBH, WBMC, LLC; BBH SBMC,
LLC; BBH CBMC, LLC,- and BBH BMC,
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
Fort Payne Hospital Corporation; The
Bibb County Healthcare Authority; The
Dale County Health Care Authority;
Greene County Hospital Board; Jackson
Hospital & Clinic, Inc.; Escambia County
Alabama Community Hospitals, Inc.;
Mizell Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The
Tombigbee Health Care Authority;
Geneva County Health Care Authority;
Community Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga
Health Care Authority; Russellville
Hospital, Inc.; Lakeland Community
Hospital, Inc.; Monroe County
AL -Circuit
Healthcare Authority; Infirmary Health
Court of
Co
C
AL
Greene County
Hospitals, Inc.; The DCH Health Care
CV-2021-
h
Hospital Board
Authority; The Healthcare Authority For
900016
County
Baptist Health, An Affiliate Of UAB
(State)
Health System; Medical West Hospital
Authority An Aff liate Of UAB Health
System; Evergreen Medical Center, LLC,•
Gilliard Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad Qf Alabama,
LLC; QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Affinity
Hospital, LLC,- Gadsden Regional
Medical Center, LLC,- Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authority
Of Clarke County, Alabama; BBHPBMC,
LLC; BBH, WBMC, LLC, BBH SBMC,
LLC; BBH CBMC, LLC; and BBH BMC,
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
The DCHHealth Care Authority, The
AL - Circuit
Healthcare
Healthcare Authority for Baptist Health,
CV-2019-
Court of
AL
Authority for
an affiliate of UAB Health System,
000007 / CV-
Conecuh
Baptist Health
Medical West Hospital Authority, an
2021-90001.6
County
affiliate of Uab Health System, Ever reen
State
C-16
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Medical Center; LLC, Gilliard Health
Services, Inc., Crest Wood Healthcare,
L.P., Triad ofAlabama, LLC, QHG of
Enterprise, Inc., Affinity Hospital, LLC,
Gadsden Regional Medical Center, LLC,
Foley Hospital Corporation, The Health
Care Authority Of Clarke County,
Alabama, BBH PBMC LLC, BBH,
WBMC, LLC, BBH SB MC, LLC, BBH
CBMC, LLC, BBH BMC, LLC v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al. /FortPayne Hospital
Corporation; The Bibb County
Healthcare Authority; The Dale County
Health Care Authority; Greene County
Hospital Board; Jackson Hospital &
Clinic, Inc.; Escambia County Alabama
Community Hospitals, Inc.; Mizell
Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The Tombigbee
Health Care Authority; Geneva County
Health Care Authority; Community
Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga Health
Care Authority; Russellville Hospital,
Inc.; Lakeland Community Hospital, Inc.;
Monroe County Healthcare Authority;
Infirmary Health Hospitals, Inc.; The
DCH Health Care Authority; The
Healthcare Authority For Baptist Health,
An Affiliate Of UAB Health System;
Medical West Hospital Authority, An
Affiliate Of UAB Health System;
Evergreen Medical Center LLC,- Gilliard
Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad OfAlabama,
LLC; QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Affinity
Hospital, LLC,- Gadsden Regional
Medical Center, LLC,- Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authority
Of Clarke County, Alabama; BBHPBMC,
LLC,- BBH, WBMC, LLC,- BBHSBMC,
LLC,- BBH CBMC, LLC,- and BBH BMC,
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
The Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A HH Health System; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D%B/A Huntsville Hospital; The
HH Health System-
Health Care Authority of the City of
Athens Limestone
Huntsville D%B/A Madison Hospital; The
N.D. Ohio
AL
LLC d/b/a Athens
Health Care Authority of the City of
1:19-op-45143
(Federal)
Limestone Hospital
Huntsville D%B/A Huntsville Hospital for
Women and Children; HHHealth System -
Morgan, LLC D/B/A Decatur Morgan
Hospital - Decatur And Decatur Morgan
Hospital - Parkway; The Health Care
Authority O Mor an County - City O
C-17
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Decatur; HHHealth System -Shoals, LLC
D/B/A Helen Keller Hospital and Red Bay
Hospital; HH Health System -Athens
Limestone, LLC D/B/A Athens Limestone
Hospital; Attentus Moulton, LLC D/B/A
Lawrence Medical Center v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A HH Health System; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Madison Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
HH Health System-
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital for
Morgan, LLC d/b/a
Women and Children; HHHealth System -
AL
Decatur Morgan
Morgan, LLC D/B/A Decatur Morgan
1:19-op-45143
N.D. Ohio
Hospital - Decatur
Hospital - Decatur And Decatur Morgan
(Federal)
and Decatur Morgan
Hospital - Parkway; The Health Care
Hospital - Parkway
Authority Of Morgan County - City Of
Decatur; HHHealth System -Shoals, LLC
D/B/A Helen Keller Hospital and Red Bay
Hospital; HHHealth System -Athens
Limestone, LLC D/B/A Athens Limestone
Hospital; Attentus Moulton, LLC D/B/A
Lawrence Medical Center v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Health Care Authority of *the City of
Huntsville D/B/A HHHealth System; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Madison Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
HH Health System-
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital for
Shoals, LLC d/b/a
Women and Children; HHHealth System -
AL
Helen Keller
Morgan, LLC D/B/A Decatur Morgan
1:19-op-45143
N.D. Ohio
Hospital and Red
Hospital - Decatur And Decatur Morgan
(Federal)
Bay Hospital
Hospital - Parkway; The Health Care
Authority Of Morgan County - City Of
Decatur; HH Health System -Shoals, LLC
D/B/A Helen Keller Hospital and Red Bay
Hospital; HH Health System -Athens
Limestone, LLC D/B/A Athens Limestone
Hospital, Attentus Moulton, LLC D/B/A
Lawrence Medical Center v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Jefferson County, Jefferson County Board
of Health, City of Pleasant Grove, City of
AL
Jefferson County
Hueytown and City of Mountain Brook
1:18-op-45558
N.D. Ohio
Board of Health
and Mike Hale, in his capacity as Sheriff
(Federal)
of Jefferson County, Alabama v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
C-18
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
The DCH Health Care Authority, The
Healthcare Authority for Baptist Health,
an affiliate of UAB Health System,
Medical West Hospital Authority, an
affiliate of Uab Health System, Evergreen
Medical Center; LLC, Gilliard Health
Services, Inc., Crest Wood Healthcare,
L.P., Triad ofAlabama, LLC, QHG of
Enterprise, Inc., Affinity Hospital, LLC,
Gadsden Regional Medical Center, LLC,
Foley Hospital Corporation, The Health
Care Authority Of Clarke County,
Alabama, BBHPBMC, LLC, BBH,
WBMC, LLC, BBH SB MC, LLC, BBH
CBMC, LLC, BBH BMC, LLC v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al. /Fort Payne Hospital
Corporation; The Bibb County
Healthcare Authority; The Dale County
Health Care Authority; Greene County
Hospital Board; Jackson Hospital &
Clinic, Inc.; Eseambia County Alabama
-Circuit
Community Hospitals, Inc.; Mizell
0 CV -Co
Court of
AL
Medical West
Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The Tombigbee
0000 / CV-
/
Conecuh
Hospital Authority
Health Care Authority; Geneva County
2021-9
2021-900016
County
Health Care Authority; Community
(State)
Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga Health
Care Authority; Russellville Hospital,
Inc.; Lakeland Community Hospital, Inc.;
Monroe County Healthcare Authority;
Infirmary Health Hospitals, Inc.; The
DCH Health Care Authority; The
Healthcare Authority For Baptist Health,
An Affiliate Of UAB Health System;
Medical West Hospital Authority, An
Affiliate Of UAB Health System;
Evergreen Medical Center, LLC;• Gilliard
Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad Qf Alabama,
LLC; QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Affinity
Hospital, LLC,- Gadsden Regional
Medical Center; LLC,- Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authority
Of Clarke County, Alabama; BBHPBMC,
LLC; BBH, WBMC, LLC, BBH SBMC,
LLC; BBH CBMC, LLC; and BBH BMC,
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
AL - Circuit
Mobile County
Mobile County Board of Health and
02-CV-2019-
Court of
AL
Board of Health
Family Oriented Primary Health Care
902806
Mobile
Clinic v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al
County
State
Monroe County
Fort Payne Hospital Corporation; The
CV-2021-
AL - Circuit
AL
Healthcare
Bibb County Healthcare Authority; The
900016
Court of
Authority
Dale County Health Care Authority
Conecuh
C-19
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Greene County Hospital Board; Jackson
County
Hospital & Clinic, Inc.; Escambia County
(State)
Alabama Community Hospitals, Inc.;
Mizell Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The
Tombigbee Health Care Authority;
Geneva County Health Care Authority;
Community Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga
Health Care Authority; Russellville
Hospital, Inc.; Lakeland Community
Hospital, Inc.; Monroe County
Healthcare Authority; Infirmary Health
Hospitals, Inc.; The DCHHealth Care
Authority; The Healthcare Authority For
Baptist Health, An Affiliate Of UAB
Health System; Medical West Hospital
Authority, An Affiliate Qf UAB Health
System; Evergreen Medical Center LLC,•
Gilliard Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad QfAlabama,
LLC; QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Amity
Hospital, LLC,- Gadsden Regional
Medical Center, LLC,- Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authority
Of Clarke County, Alabama; BBHPBMC,
LLC; BBH, WBMC LLC, BBH SBMC,
LLC; BBH CBMC, LLC,- and BBH BMC,
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
Sheriff of Etowah
City of Gadsden, Etowah County, and
N.D. Ohio
AL
County (Sheriff
Todd Entrekin, Sheriff of Etowah County,
1:17-op-45101
(Federal)
Todd Entrekin)
Alabama v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Fayette
Fayette County, City of Fayette, Town of
AL
County (Sheriff
Berry and Rodney Ingle, in his capacity
1:18-op-45211
N.D. Ohio
Rodney Ingle)
as Sheriff of Fayette County, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Jefferson County, Jefferson County Board
Sheriff of Jefferson
of Health, City of Pleasant Grove, City of
AL
County (Sheriff
Hueytown and City ofMountain Brook
1:18-op-45558
N.D. Ohio
Mike Hale)
and Mike Hale, in his capacity as Sheriff
(Federal)
of Jefferson County, Alabama v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Lamar
Lamar County, Alabama, City of Vernon,
AL
County (Sheriff Hal
Alabama and Hal Allred, in his capacity
1:18-op-45210
N.D. Ohio
Allred)
as Sheriff of Lamar County, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Fort Payne Hospital Corporation; The
Bibb County Healthcare Authority; The
Dale County Health Care Authority;
AL - Circuit
Sylacauga Health
Greene County Hospital Board; Jackson
Court of
AL
Care Authority d/b/a
Hospital & Clinic, Inc.; Escambia County
CV-2021-
h
Coosa Valley
Alabama Community Hospitals, Inc.;
900016
County
Medical Center
Mizell Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The
(State)
Tombigbee Health Care Authority;
Geneva County Health Care Authority;
Community Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga
C-20
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Health Care Authority; Russellville
Hospital, Inc.; Lakeland Community
Hospital, Inc.; Monroe County
Healthcare Authority; Infirmary Health
Hospitals, Inc.; The DCHHealth Care
Authority; The Healthcare Authority For
Baptist Health, An Affiliate Of UAB
Health System; Medical West Hospital
Authority An Affiliate Of UAB Health
System; Evergreen Medical Center; LLC,•
Gilliard Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad OfAlabama,
LLC QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Affinity
Hospital, LLC,- Gadsden Regional
Medical Center; LLC,- Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authority
Of Clarke County, Alabama; BBH PBMC,
LLC; BBH, WBMC, LLC; BBH SBMC,
LLC; BBH CBMC, LLC and BBH BMC,
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
The DCH Health Care Authority, The
Healthcare Authority for Baptist Health,
an affiliate of UAB Health System,
Medical West Hospital Authority, an
affiliate of Uab Health System, Evergreen
Medical Center; LLC, Gilliard Health
Services, Inc., Crest Wood Healthcare,
L.P., Triad ofAlabama, LLC, QHG of
Enterprise, Inc., Affinity Hospital, LLC,
Gadsden Regional Medical Center; LLC
Foley Hospital Corporation, The Health
Care Authority Of Clarke County,
Alabama, BBHPBMC, LLC, BBH,
WBMC, LLC, BBH SB MC, LLC, BBH
CBMC LLC, BBH BMC, LLC v. Purdue
-Circuit
The Health Care
Pharma L.P., et al. /Fort Payne Hospital
CV-2019-
Court of
Co
AL
Authority of Clarke
Corporation; The Bibb County
000007 / CV-
Conecuh
County
Healthcare Authority; The Dale County
2021-900016
County
Health Care Authority; Greene County
(State)
Hospital Board; Jackson Hospital &
Clinic, Inc.; Escambia County Alabama
Community Hospitals, Inc.; Mizell
Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The Tombigbee
Health Care Authority; Geneva County
Health Care Authority; Community
Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga Health
Care Authority; Russellville Hospital,
Inc.; Lakeland Community Hospital, Inc.;
Monroe County Healthcare Authority;
Infirmary Health Hospitals, Inc.; The
DCH Health Care Authority; The
Healthcare Authority For Baptist Health,
An Affiliate Of UAB Health System;
Medical West Hospital Authority, An
C-21
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Affiliate Of UAB Health System;
Evergreen Medical Center LLC; Gilliard
Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad OfAlabama,
LLC; QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Affinity
Hospital, LLC,- Gadsden Regional
Medical Center; LLC; Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authority
Of Clarke County, Alabama; BBHPBMC,
LLC; BBH, WBMC, LLC, BBH SBMC
LLC BBH CBMC, LLC,- and BBH BMC,
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
The Health Care
The Health Care Authority of Cullman
AL
Authority of
County; Cullman Regional Medical
1:19-op-46059
N.D. Ohio
Cullman County
Center, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
(Federal)
USA, Inc., et al.
The Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A HH Health System; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Madison Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital for
The Health Care
Women and Children; HHHealth System -
AL
Authority of
Morgan, LLC D/B/A Decatur Morgan
1:19-op-45143
N.D. Ohio
Morgan County -
Hospital - Decatur And Decatur Morgan
(Federal)
City of Decatur
Hospital - Parkway; The Health Care
Authority Of Morgan County - City Of
Decatur; HHHealth System -Shoals, LLC
D/B/A Helen Keller Hospital and Red Bay
Hospital; HH Health System -Athens
Limestone, LLCD/B/A Athens Limestone
Hospital; Attentus Moulton, LLC D/B/A
Lawrence Medical Center v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A HH Health System; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Madison Hospital; The
The Health Care
Health Care Authority of the City of
Authority of the
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital for
AL
City of Huntsville
Women and Children; HHHealth System-
1:19-op-45143
N.D. Ohio
d/b/a HH Health
Morgan, LLC D/B/A Decatur Morgan
(Federal)
System
Hospital - Decatur And Decatur Morgan
Hospital - Parkway; The Health Care
Authority Of Morgan County - City Of
Decatur HHHealth System -Shoals, LLC
D/B/A Helen Keller Hospital and Red Bay
Hospital; HHHealth System -Athens
Limestone, LLC D/B/A Athens Limestone
Hospital; Attentus Moulton, LLC D/B/A
C-22
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Lawrence Medical Center v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A HHHealth System; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Madison Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
The Health Care
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital for
Authority of the
Women and Children; HHHealth System -
AL
City of Huntsville
Morgan, LLC D/B/A Decatur Morgan
1:19-op-45143
N.D. Ohio
d/b/a Huntsville
Hospital - Decatur And Decatur Morgan
(Federal)
Hospital
Hospital - Parkway; The Health Care
Authority Of Morgan County - City Of
Decatur; HH Health System -Shoals, LLC
D/B/A Helen Keller Hospital and Red Bay
Hospital; HHHealth System -Athens
Limestone, LLC D/B/A Athens Limestone
Hospital; Attentus Moulton, LLC D/B/A
Lawrence Medical Center v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A HH Health System; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A Madison Hospital; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
The Health Care
Huntsville D/B/A Huntsville Hospital for
Authority of the
Women and Children; HHHealth System -
AL
City of Huntsville
Morgan, LLCD/B/A Decatur Morgan
1:1.9-op-45143
N.D. Ohio
d/b/a Huntsville
Hospital - Decatur And Decatur Morgan
(Federal)
Hospital for Women
Hospital - Parkway; The Health Care
and Children
Authority Of Morgan County - City Of
Decatur; HH Health System -Shoals, LLC
D/B/A Helen Keller Hospital and Red Bay
Hospital; HHHealth System -Athens
Limestone, LLCD/B/A Athens Limestone
Hospital; Attentus Moulton, LLCD/B/A
Lawrence Medical Center v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Health Care Authority of the City of
Huntsville D/B/A HHHealth System; The
Health Care Authority of the City of
The Health Care
Huntsville D%B/A Huntsville Hospital; The
Authority of the
Health Care Authority of the City of
AL
City of Huntsville
Huntsville D%B/A Madison Hospital,• The
1:19-op-45143
N.D. Ohio
d/b/a Madison
Health Care Authority of the City of
(Federal)
Hospital
Huntsville D%B/A Huntsville Hospital for
Women and Children; HHHealth System -
Morgan, LLC D/B/A Decatur Morgan
Hospital - Decatur And Decatur Morgan
Hospital - Parkway; The Health Care
C-23
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Authority Of Morgan County - City Of
Decatur; HH Health System -Shoals, LLC
DB/A Helen Keller Hospital and Red Bay
Hospital; HH Health System -Athens
Limestone, LLC D/B/A Athens Limestone
Hospital; Attentus Moulton, LLC D/B/A
Lawrence Medical Center v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
The Jackson County
Health Care
The Jackson County Health Care
1:19-op-45134
N.D. Ohio
Authority
Authority v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
The Marshall
County Health Care
The Marshall County Health Care
Authority d/b/a
Authority, a Public Corporation d/b/a
N.D. Ohio
AL
Marshall Medical
Marshall Medical Center North d/b/a
1:18-op-45538
(Federal)
Center North d/b/a
Marshall Medical Center South v. Purdue
Marshall Medical
Pharma L.P., et al
Center South
Fort Payne Hospital Corporation; The
Bibb County Healthcare Authority; The
Dale County Health Care Authority;
Greene County Hospital Board; Jackson
Hospital & Clinic, Inc.; Escambia County
Alabama Community Hospitals, Inc.;
Mizell Memorial Hospital, Inc.; The
Tombigbee Health Care Authority;
Geneva County Health Care Authority;
Community Hospital, Inc.; The Sylacauga
Health Care Authority; Russellville
Hospital, Inc.; Lakeland Community
Hospital, Inc.; Monroe County
AL - Circuit
Tombigbee Health
Healthcare Authority; Infirmary Health
Court of
AL
Care Authority d/b/a
Hospitals, Inc.; The DCHHealth Care
CV-2021-
h
Brian. W. Whitfield
Authority; The Healthcare Authority For
900016
County
Memorial Hospital
Baptist Health, An Affiliate Of UAB
(State)
Health System; Medical West Hospital
Authority An Aff liate Of UAB Health
System; Evergreen Medical Center, LLC,•
Gilliard Health Services, Inc.; Crestwood
Healthcare, L.P.; Triad Of Alabama,
LLC; QHG Of Enterprise, Inc.; Affinity
Hospital, LLC; Gadsden Regional
Medical Center; LLC; Foley Hospital
Corporation; The Health Care Authority
Of Clarke County, Alabama; BBHPBMC,
LLC; BBH, WBMC, LLC, BBH SBMC
LLC; BBH CBMC, LLC; and BBH BMC
LLC v. McKesson Corporation, et al.
Fayette County, City of Fayette, Town of
AL
Town of Berry
Berry and Rodney Ingle, in his capacity
1:18-op-45211
N.D. Ohio
as Sheriff ofFayette County, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
C-24
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District f
Town of
City of Northport, City of Robertsdale and
N.D. Ohio
AL
Brookwood
Town of Brookwood Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45272
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
Town of Butler
Town of Butler; Alabama v. McKesson
1:18-op-45216
N.D. Ohio
Cor oration, et al.
Federal
City of Fultondale, City of Graysville,
City of Centre, Town of Cedar Bluff, City
AL
Town of Camp Hill
of Dadeville, Town of Camp Hill, Town of
1:20-op-45265
N.D. Ohio
Oakman, City ofAttalla and Town of
(Federal)
Gilbertown, Alabama v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City of Fultondale, City of Graysville,
City of Centre, Town of Cedar Bluff, City
AL
Town of Cedar
of Dadeville, Town of Camp Hill, Town of
1:20-op-45265
N.D. Ohio
Bluff
Oakman, City ofAttalla and Town of
(Federal)
Gilbertown, Alabama v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
The Town of Cherokee and the City of
AL
Town of Cherokee
Tuscumbia, Alabama, and the Counties of*
1:18-op-45005
N.D. Ohio
Colbert and Franklin, Alabama v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Town of Cleveland, Town of Gurley and
N.D. Ohio
AL
Town of Cleveland
Town of Priceville, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45217
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
Town of Dauphin
Town of Dauphin Island, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45119
N.D. Ohio
Island
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
Town of Double
Town ofDouble Springs, Alabama v.
N.D. Ohio
AL
Springs
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45739
(Federal)
al
Marshall County; the Cities of Albertville,
AL
Town of Douglas
Arab, Boaz and Guntersville; and the
1:18-op-45230
N.D. Ohio
Towns ofDouglas and Grant, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
AL
Town ofFaunsdale
Town ofFaunsdale, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45122
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
AL
Town of Fort
Town of Fort Deposit, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45427
N.D. Ohio
Deposit
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Jackson County, City of Bridgeport, City
of Henagar, City of New Hope, City of
AL
Town of Geraldine
Scottsboro, Town of Geraldine and Town
1:18-op-45634
N.D. Ohio
of Woodville, Alabama v.
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
City of Fultondale, City of Graysville,
City of Centre, Town of Cedar Bluff, City
AL
Town of Gilbertown
of Dadeville, Town of Camp Hill, Town of
1:20-op-45265
N.D. Ohio
Oakman, City ofAttalla and Town of
(Federal)
Gilbertown, Alabama v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Marshall County; the Cities of Albertville,
AL
Town of Grant
Arab, Boaz and Guntersville; and the
1: 1 8-op-45230
N.D. Ohio
Towns ofDouglas and Grant, Alabama v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
C-25
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Town of Cleveland, Town of Gurley and
N.D. Ohio
AL
Town of Gurley
Town ofPriceville, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45217
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City of Rainsville and Town of
AL
Town of
Hammondville, Alabama v.
1:19-op-45135
N.D. Ohio
Hammondville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
City of Red Bay, City of Russellville, City
AL
Town of Leighton
of Sheffield and Town of'Leighton,
1:19-op-45136
N.D. Ohio
Alabama v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
AL
Town of Locust
Town of Locust Fork v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45777
N.D. Ohio
Fork
L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Bay Minette, Alabama; Town of
Loxley, Alabama; and Town of
N.D. Ohio
AL
Town of Loxley
Summerdale, Alabama v.
1:22-op-45018
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
AL
Town of McKenzie
Town of McKenzie, Alabama v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45435
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AL
Town of Munford
Town ofMunford, Alabama v. Cardinal
1: 1 8-op-45785
N.D. Ohio
Health, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Fultondale, City of Graysville,
City of Centre, Town of Cedar Bluff, City
AL
Town of Oakman
of Dadeville, Town of Camp Hill, Town of
1:20-op-45265
N.D. Ohio
Oakman, City of Attalla and Town of
(Federal)
Gilbertown, Alabama v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Dekalb County and the Town of Powell,
N.D. Ohio
AL
Town of Powell
Alabama v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:20-op-45209
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
Town of Cleveland, Town of Gurley and
N.D. Ohio
AL
Town of Priceville
Town ofPriceville, Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45217
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
AL
Town of Rockford
Town of Rockford, Alabama v. Purdue
1:1.9-op-45915
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Bay Minette, Alabama; Town of
Town of
Loxley, Alabama; and Town of
N.D. Ohio
AL
Summredale
Summerdale, Alabama v.
1:22-op-45018
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
AL
Town of Sweet
Town ofSweet Water; Alabama v. Teva
1:20-op-45120
N.D. Ohio
Water
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
AL
Town of Vance
Town of Vance, Alabama v. Purdue
1:19-op-45909
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Opelika, City of Spanish Fort, City
AL
Town of West
of Centreville, City of Slocomb and Town
1:20-op-45208
N.D. Ohio
Blocton
of West Blocton v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
(Federal)
USA, Inc., et al.
Jackson County, City of'Bridgeport, City
AL
Town of Woodville
ofHenagar, City ofNew Hope, City of
1: 1 8-op-45634
N.D. Ohio
Scottsboro, Town of Geraldine and Town
(Federal)
of Woodville, Alabama v.
C-26
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
AL
Town of Yellow
Town of Yellow Bluff, Alabama v. Purdue
1:18-op-45423
N.D. Ohio
Bluff
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AZ
City of Bullhead
Bullhead City, Arizona v. Actavis, Inc., et
1:21-op-45085
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
AZ
City of Glendale
City of Glendale, Arizona v. Actavis, Inc.,
1:21-op-45086
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
AZ
City of Kingman
City of Kingman v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-46057
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
AZ
City of Phoenix
City of Phoenix, Arizona v. Purdue
1:18-op-45510
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
AZ
City of Prescott
The City of Prescott, Arizona v. Actavis,
1:21-op-45090
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.
Federal
AZ
City of Surprise
City of Surprise, Arizona v. Actavis, Inc.,
1:21-op-45091
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
AZ
City of Tucson
City of Tucson v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45267
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
AZ
County of Apache
County ofApache, Arizona v. Actavis,
1:21-op-45084
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.
Federal
AZ
County of Cochise
Cochise County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45855
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
AZ
County of La Paz
County ofLa Paz, Arizona v. Actavis,
1:21-op-45087
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.
Federal
AZ
County of Mancopa
Maricopa County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45020
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
AZ
County of Mohave
Mohave County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45117
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
AZ
County of Navajo
Navajo County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:1.9-op-45217
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
AZ
County of Pima
Pima County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45268
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
AZ
County of Pinal
Pinal County, Arizona v. Actavis, Inc., et
1:21-op-45088
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
AZ
County of Yuma
Puma County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45575
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
City and County of
The City and County of San Francisco,
San Francisco (City
California and the People of the State of
N.D.
CA
Attorney Dennis J.
California, acting by and through San
3:18-cv-07591
California
Herrera)
Francisco City Attorney Dennis J.
(Federal)
Herrera v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
County ofAlameda; City of Costa Mesa;
City of Anaheim; City of Santa Ana; City
ofSan Clemente; City of Encinitas; City
ofLa Habra; City of La Mesa; City of
City of Anaheim
Oxnard; City of Placentia; and The
CA
(City Attorney
People of The State of California, by and
1:20-op-45055
N.D. Ohio
Robert Fabela)
through Alameda County Counsel Donna
(Federal)
Ziegler, Costa Mesa City Attorney
Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Anaheim City
Attorney Robert Fabela, Santa Ana City
Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho, San
Clemente City Attorney Scott C. Smith,
C-27
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Encinitas City Attorney Leslie Devaney,
La Habra City Attorney Richard D. Jones,
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine,
Oxnard City Attorney Stephen Fischer,
Placentia City Attorney Christian
Bettenhausen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
City of Chico, California; The People of
the State of California, acting by and
N.D. Ohio
CA
City of Chico
through the City of Chico, Plaintiffs V.
1:20-op-45189
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
CA
City of Chula Vista
City of Chula Vista, California v. Purdue
1:19-op-45750
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Clearlake, California; The People
CA
City of Clearlake
of the State of California, acting by and
1:20-op-45251
N.D. Ohio
through the City of Clearlake v. Teva
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
County ofAlameda; City of Costa Mesa;
City of Anaheim; City of Santa Ana; City
of San Clemente; City of Encinitas; City
of La Habra; City of La Mesa; City of
Oxnard; City of Placentia; and The
People of The State of California, by and
through Alameda County Counsel Donna
City of Costa Mesa
Ziegler; Costa Mesa City Attorney
(City Attorney
Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Anaheim City
N.D. Ohio
CA
Kimberly Hall
Attorney Robert Fabela, Santa Ana City
1:20-op-45055
(Federal)
Barlow)
Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho, San
Clemente City Attorney Scott C. Smith,
Encinitas City Attorney Leslie Devaney,
La Habra City Attorney Richard D. Jones,
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine,
Oxnard City Attorney Stephen Fischer,
Placentia City Attorney Christian
Bettenhausen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
City of Dublin, City of Murrieta and The
City of Dublin (City
People of the State of California, by and
CA
Attorney John
through Dublin City Attorney John
1:20-op-45255
N.D. Ohio
Bakker)
Bakker and Murrieta City Attorney Leslie
(Federal)
Devaney v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
MDL -
City of El Monte
City of El Monte and the People of the
Prescription
Opioid Cases
CA
(City Attorney Rick
State of California, by and through El
JCCP 5029
(CA -County
Olivarez)
Monte City Attorney Rick Olivarcz v.
of Los
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al
Angeles)
State MDL
City of Encinitas
County ofAlameda; City of Costa Mesa;
N.D. Ohio
CA
(City Attorney
City of Anaheim; City of Santa Ana; City
1:20-op-45055
(Federal)
Leslie Devaney)
o San Clemente; City o Encinitas; Ci
C-28
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
ofLa Habra; City ofLa Mesa; City of
Oxnard; City of Placentia; and The
People of The State of California, by and
through Alameda County Counsel Donna
Ziegler, Costa Mesa City Attorney
Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Anaheim City
Attorney Robert Fabela, Santa Ana City
Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho, San
Clemente City Attorney Scott C. Smith,
Encinitas City Attorney Leslie Devaney,
La Habra City Attorney Richard D. Jones,
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine,
Oxnard City Attorney Stephen Fischer,
Placentia City Attorney Christian
Bettenhausen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
City of Eureka (City
City of Eureka, the People of the State of
CA
Attorney Robert
California, acting by and through Interim
L• 18-op-46092
N.D. Ohio
Norris Black)
Eureka City Attorney, Robert Norris
(Federal)
Black v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
City of Fullerton, City of Westminster and
City of Fullerton
the People of the State of California, by
N.D. Ohio
CA
(City Attorney
and through Fullerton and Westminster
1:20-op-45143
(Federal)
Richard D. Jones)
City Attorney Richard D. Jones v.
Ce halon, Inc., et al.
CA
City of Huntington
City of Huntington Beach, California v.
1:18-op-45588
N.D. Ohio
Beach
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Irvine (City
City ofirvine and the People of the State
CA
Attorney Jeffrey
of California, by and through Irvine City
1:1.9-op-45734
N.D. Ohio
Melching)
Attorney Jeffrey Melching v. Purdue
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
County of Alameda; City of Costa Mesa;
City of Anaheim; City of Santa Ana; City
of San Clemente; City of Encinitas; City
ofLa Habra; City ofLa Mesa; City of
Oxnard; City of Placentia; and The
People of The State of California, by and
through Alameda County Counsel Donna
Ziegler, Costa Mesa City Attorney
City of La Habra
Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Anaheim City
N.D. Ohio
CA
(City Attorney
Attorney Robert Fabela, Santa Ana City
1:20-op-45055
(Federal)
Richard D. Jones)
Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho, San
Clemente City Attorney Scott C. Smith,
Encinitas City Attorney Leslie Devaney,
La Habra City Attorney Richard D. Jones,
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine,
Oxnard City Attorney Stephen Fischer;
Placentia City Attorney Christian
Bettenhausen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
City of La Mesa
County ofAlameda; City of Costa Mesa;
N.D. Ohio
CA
(City Attorney
City of Anaheim; City of Santa Ana; City
1:20-op-45055
(Federal)
Glenn Sabine)
o San Clemente; City o Encinitas; Ci
C-29
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
of La Habra; City of La Mesa; City of
Oxnard; City of Placentia; and The
People of The State of California, by and
through Alameda County Counsel Donna
Ziegler, Costa Mesa City Attorney
Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Anaheim City
Attorney Robert Fabela, Santa Ana City
Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho, San
Clemente City Attorney Scott C. Smith,
Encinitas City Attorney Leslie Devaney,
La Habra City Attorney Richard D. Jones,
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine,
Oxnard City Attorney Stephen Fischer,
Placentia City Attorney Christian
Bettenhausen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
CA
City of Laguna
City of Laguna Beach, California v.
1:19-op-45447
N.D. Ohio
Beach
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Lakeport, California; The People
CA
City of Lakeport
of *the State of California, acting by and
1:20-op-45242
N.D. Ohio
through the City of Lakeport v. Teva
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
CA
City of Los Angeles
City of Los Angeles, California v. Purdue
1:18-op-45601
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Dublin, City of Murrieta and The
City of Murrieta
People of the State of California, by and
CA
(City Attorney
through Dublin City Attorney John
1:20-op-45255
N.D. Ohio
Leslie Devaney)
Bakker and Murrieta City Attorney Leslie
(Federal)
Devaney v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
The People of the State of California,
acting by and through Santa Clara
City of Oakland
County Counsel James R. Williams,
30-2014-
CA - County
CA
(City Attorney
Orange County District Attorney Tony
00725287-CU-
of Orange
Barbara J. Parker)
Rackauckas, Los Angeles County Counsel
BT-CXC
(State)
Mary C. Wickham, and Oakland City
Attorney Barbara J. Parker v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
County ofAlameda; City of Costa Mesa;
City of Anaheim; City of Santa Ana; City
of San Clemente; City of Encinitas; City
of La Habra; City of La Mesa; City of
Oxnard; City of Placentia; and The
People of The State of California, by and
City of Oxnard
through Alameda County Counsel Donna
N.D. Ohio
CA
(City Attorney
Ziegler, Costa Mesa City Attorney
1:20-op-45055
(Federal)
Stephen. Fischer)
Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Anaheim City
Attorney Robert Fabela, Santa Ana City
Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho, San
Clemente City Attorney Scott C Smith,
Encinitas City Attorney Leslie Devaney,
La Habra City Attorney Richard D. Jones,
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine,
C-30
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Oxnard City Attorney Stephen Fischer,
Placentia City Attorney Christian
Bettenhausen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
County ofAlameda; City of Costa Mesa;
City of Anaheim; City of Santa Ana; City
ofSan Clemente; City of Encinitas; City
ofLa Habra; City of La Mesa; City of
Oxnard; City of Placentia; and The
People of The State of California, by and
through Alameda County Counsel Donna
City of Placentia
Ziegler, Costa Mesa City Attorney
(City Attorney
Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Anaheim City
N.D. Ohio
CA
Christian
Attorney Robert Fabela, Santa Ana City
1:20-op-45055
(Federal)
Bettenhausen)
Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho, San
Clemente City Attorney Scott C. Smith,
Encinitas City Attorney Leslie Devaney,
La Habra City Attorney Richard D. Jones,
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine,
Oxnard City Attorney Stephen Fischer,
Placentia City Attorney Christian
Bettenhausen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
City of Sacramento
The City of Sacramento and The People of
(City Attorney
the State of California, acting by and
N.D. Ohio
CA
Susana Alcala
through the City of Sacramento City
1:20-op-45290
(Federal)
Wood)
Attorney Susana Alcala Wood v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
County of Alameda; City of Costa Mesa;
City of Anaheim; City of Santa Ana; City
of San Clemente; City of Encinitas; City
ofLa Habra; City ofLa Mesa; City of
Oxnard; City of Placentia; and The
People of The State of California, by and
through Alameda County Counsel Donna
City of San
Ziegler, Costa Mesa City Attorney
Clemente (City
Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Anaheim City
N.D. Ohio
CA
Attorney Scott C.
Attorney Robert Fabela, Santa Ana City
1:20-op-45055
(Federal)
Smith)
Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho, San
Clemente City Attorney Scott C. Smith,
Encinitas City Attorney Leslie Devaney,
La Habra City Attorney Richard D. Jones,
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine,
Oxnard City Attorney Stephen Fischer,
Placentia City Attorney Christian
Bettenhausen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
City of San Diego
The City of San Diego and the People of
CA
(City Attorney Mara
the State of California, by and through
1:19-op-45192
N.D. Ohio
W. Elliot)
Mara W. Elliot, City Attorney of San
(Federal)
Diego v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
CA
City of San Jose
City of San Jose, California, The People
1:19-op-45768
N.D. Ohio
o the State o Cali oonia, actin b and
Federal
C-31
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
through the City of San Jose v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
County ofAlameda; City of Costa Mesa;
City of'Anaheim; City of Santa Ana; City
ofSan Clemente; City of Encinitas; City
ofLa Habra; City of La Mesa; City of
Oxnard; City of Placentia; and The
People of The State of California, by and
through Alameda County Counsel Donna
Ziegler; Costa Mesa City Attorney
City of Santa Ana
Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Anaheim City
N.D. Ohio
CA
(City Attorney
Attorney Robert Fabela, Santa Ana City
1:20-op-45055
(Federal)
Sonia R. Carvalho)
Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho, San
Clemente City Attorney Scott C. Smith,
Encinitas City Attorney Leslie Devaney,
La Habra City Attorney Richard D. Jones,
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine,
Oxnard City Attorney Stephen Fischer,
Placentia City Attorney Christian
Bettenhausen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
City of Fullerton, City of Westminster and
City of Westminster
the People of the State of California, by
N.D. Ohio
CA
(City Attorney
and through Fullerton and Westminster
1:20-op-45143
(Federal)
Richard D. Jones)
City Attorney Richard D. Jones v.
Ce halon, Inc., et al.
County ofAlameda; City of Costa Mesa;
City of Anaheim; City of Santa Ana; City
of San Clemente; City of Encinitas; City
ofLa Habra; City ofLa Mesa; City of
Oxnard; City of Placentia; and The
People of The State of California, by and
through Alameda County Counsel Donna
Ziegler; Costa Mesa City Attorney
County of Alameda
Kimberly Hall Barlow, and Anaheim City
N.D. Ohio
CA
(County Counsel
Attorney Robert Fabela, Santa Ana City
1:20-op-45055
(Federal)
Donna Ziegler)
Attorney Sonia R. Carvalho, San
Clemente City Attorney Scott C. Smith,
Encinitas City Attorney Leslie Devaney,
La Habra City Attorney Richard D. Jones,
La Mesa City Attorney Glenn Sabine,
Oxnard City Attorney Stephen Fischer,
Placentia City Attorney Christian
Bettenhausen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
County ofAmador; The People of the
State of California, acting by and through
N.D. Ohio
CA
County of Amador
the County ofAmador v.
1:18-op-46075
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
County of Butte; The People of the State
CA
County of Butte
of California, acting by and through the
1:18-op-45627
N.D. Ohio
County of Butte v. AmerisourceBergen
(Federal)
Drug Corporation, et al.
C-32
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County of Calaveras; The People of the
State of California, acting by and through
N.D. Ohio
CA
County of Calaveras
the County of Calaveras v.
1: 1 8-op-45645
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
County of Contra Costa; The People of
County of Contra
the State of California, acting by and
N.D. Ohio
CA
Costa
through the County of Contra Costa v.
1: 1 8-op-45656
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
County of Del Norte; The People of the
State of California, acting by and through
N.D. Ohio
CA
County of Del Norte
the County of Del Norte v.
1:18-op-45655
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
County of El Dorado; The People of the
County of El
State of California, acting by and through
N.D. Ohio
CA
Dorado
the County of El Dorado v.
1: 1 8-op-45629
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
CA
County of Fresno
County of Fresno v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45644
N.D. Ohio
Du Cor oration, et al.
Federal
County of Glenn; The People of the State
CA
County of Glenn
of California, acting by and through the
1:18-op-45639
N.D. Ohio
County of Glenn v. AmerisourceBergen
(Federal)
Drug Corporation, et al.
CA
County of Humboldt
Humboldt County, California v. Purdue
1:18-op-45942
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
County oflmperial; The People of the
State of California, acting by and through
N.D. Ohio
CA
County of Imperial
the County oflmperial v.
1:18-op-45631
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
CA
County of Inyo
County oflnyo v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45646
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MDL -
County of Kern
County of Kern and the People of the
Prescription
Opioid Cases
CA
(County Attorney
State of California, by and through Kern
JCCP 5029
(CA - County
Margo Ralson)
County Attorney Margo Ralson v. Purdue
of Los
Pharma L.P., et al.
Angeles)
State MDL)
CA
County of Lassen
County of Lassen v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45609
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.
Federal
The People of the State of California,
acting by and through Santa Clara
County of Los
County Counsel James R. Williams,
30-2014-
CA - County
CA
Angeles (County
Orange County District Attorney Tony
00725287-CU-
of Orange
Counsel Mary C.
Rackauckas, Los Angeles County Counsel
BT-CXC
(State)
Wickham)
Mary C. Wickham, and Oakland City
Attorney Barbara J Parker v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
C-33
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
CA
County of Madera
County of Madera v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45647
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
CA
County of Marin
County of Marin v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45657
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
County ofMariposa v.
N.D. Ohio
CA
County of Mariposa
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45618
(Federal)
al.
County of
County of Mendocino v.
N.D. Ohio
CA
Mendocino
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45654
(Federal)
CA
County of Merced
County ofMerced v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45643
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
CA
County of Modoc
County of Modoc v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45641
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
CA
County of Mono
County ofMono v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45626
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
County ofMonterey v.
N.D. Ohio
CA
County of Monterey
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45615
(Federal)
al.
CA
County of Napa
County of Napa, California v. Purdue
1:18-op-45750
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
CA
County of Nevada
County of Nevada v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45628
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
The People of the State of California,
acting by and through Santa Clara
County of Orange
County Counsel James R. Williams,
30-2014-
CA - County
CA
(District Attorney
Orange County District Attorney Tony
00725287-CU-
of Orange
Tony Rackauckas)
Rackauckas, Los Angeles County Counsel
BT-CXC
(State)
Mary C. Wickham, and Oakland City
Attorney Barbara J. Parker v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
CA
County of Placer
County ofPlacer v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45642
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.
(Federal)
CA
County of Plumas
County ofPlumas v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45649
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
County of Riverside v.
N.D. Ohio
CA
County of Riverside
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45878
(Federal)
al.
County of
County of Sacramento v.
N.D. Ohio
CA
Sacramento
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45608
(Federal)
County of San
County ofSan Benito v.
N.D. Ohio
CA
Benito
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45653
(Federal)
CA
County of San
County ofSan Bernardino v. Purdue
1:18-op-46032
N.D. Ohio
Bernardino
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
County of San
County ofSan Diego v.
N.D. Ohio
CA
Diego
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45613
(Federal)
CA
County of San Luis
County ofSan Luis Obispo, California v.
1:18-op-46290
N.D. Ohio
Obispo
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
C-34
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
County of San
County of San Mateo, California v.
1:18-op-46319 /
N.D. Ohio
CA
Mateo
McKesson Corporation, et al. / County of
1:19-op-45126
(Federal)
San Mateo v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
County of Santa
County of Santa Barbara, the People of
N.D. Ohio
CA
Barbara
the State of California v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45128
(Federal)
L.P., et al.
The People of the State of California,
acting by and through Santa Clara
County of Santa
County Counsel James R. Williams,
30-2
-County
CA
Clara (County
Orange County District Attorney Tony
5287-CU-
of14-
Orange
Counsel James R.
Rackauckas, Los Angeles County Counsel
T-CX
T-CXC
BState)
(S
Williams)
Mary C. Wickham, and Oakland City
Attorney Barbara J Parker v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
CA
County of Santa
County of Santa Cruz, California v.
1:18-op-45679
N.D. Ohio
Cruz
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
CA
County of Shasta
County of Shasta v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45651
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
CA
County of Siskiyou
County ofSiskiyou v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45630
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
CA
County of Sonoma
County ofSonoma, California v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45849
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
CA
County of Sutter
County ofSutter v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45640
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
CA
County of Tehama
County of Tehama v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45680
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
CA
County of Trinity
County of Trinity v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45650
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
CA
County of Tulare
County of Tulare, California v. Purdue
1:18-op-45997
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of
County of Tuolumne v.
N.D. Ohio
CA
Tuolumne
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45619
(Federal)
CA
County of Ventura
County of Ventura v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45747
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County of Yolo; The People of the State of
County of Yolo
California, acting by and through the
N.D. Ohio
CA
(County Counsel
Yolo County Counsel v.
1: 19-op-453 5 1
(Federal)
Philip Pogledich)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
CA
County of Yuba
County of Yuba v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45648
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
Socorro Independent School District,
MDL - In re
Downey Unitiied School District, Kern
Texas Opioid
High School District, Waukegan
Litigation
Community Unit School District, Bibb
2020-70878 /
(TX - 152nd
Downey Unified
County School District, South Bend
2018-63587
Judicial
CA
School District
Community School Corp., Mesa County
(master) / 1:21-
District of
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
op-45080
Harris
Unified School District, Smith -Green
County)
Community Schools, School City of
(State MDL)
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
/ N.D. Ohio
o Hillview, KY, City o She herdsville,
Federal
C-35
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
KY, and City of Mt. Washington, KY v.
Abb Vie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
Independent School Dist., Irving
Independent School District, Socorro
Independent School District, Downey
Unified School District, Kern High School
District, Waukegan Community Unit
School District, Bibb County School
District, South Bend Community School
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of *Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
Socorro Independent School District,
Downey Unified School District, Kern
High School District, Waukegan
Community Unit School District, Bibb
County School District, South Bend
Community School Corp., Mesa County
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
Unified School District, Smith -Green
Community Schools, School City of
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
MDL - In re
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
Texas Opioid
KY, and City ofMt. Washington, KY v.
Litigation
Abb Vie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
2020-70878 /
(TX - 152nd
Elk Grove Unified
Independent School Dist., Irving
201&63587
Judicial
CA
School District
Independent School District, Socorro
(master) / 1:21-
District of
Independent School District, Downey
op-45080
Harris
Unified School District, Kern High School
County)
District, Waukegan Community Unit
(State MDL)
School District, Bibb County School
/ N.D. Ohio
District, South Bend Community School
(Federal)
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
CA
Health Plan of San
Health Plan of San Joaquin v. Teva
1:19-op-46093
N.D. Ohio
Joaquin
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
Socorro Independent School District,
2020-70878 /
MDL - In re
Kern HighSchool
.
Downey Unified School District, Kern
2018-63587
Texas Opioid
CA
District
High School District, Waukegan
(master) / 1:21-
Litigation
Community Unit School District, Bibb
op-45080
(TX - 152nd
County School District, South Bend
Judicial
C-36
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Community School Corp., Mesa County
District of
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
Harris
Unified School District, Smith -Green
County)
Community Schools, School City of
(State MDL)
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
/ N.D. Ohio
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
(Federal)
KY, and City of Mt. Washington, KY v.
AbbVie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
Independent School Dist., Irving
Independent School District, Socorro
Independent School District, Downey
Unified School District, Kern High School
District, Waukegan Community Unit
School District, Bibb County School
District, South Bend Community School
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District Sl, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
Lassen County
Susanville Elementary School District and
N.D. Ohio
CA
Office of Education
Lassen County Office of Education v.
1:22-op-45031
(Federal)
Ce halon, Inc., et al.
Local Initiative
Health Authority for
Local Initiative Health Authority for Los
CA
Los Angeles County
Angeles County, a California local public
1:19-op-45212
N.D. Ohio
o/a L.A. Care
agency operating as L.A. Care Health
(Federal)
Health Plan.
Plan v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
CA
Pleasant Valley
Pleasant Valley School District v.
1:21-op-45120
N.D. Ohio
School District
Ce halon, Inc., et al.
Federal
CA
San Leandro
Unified School
San Leandro Unified School District v.
1:21-op-45114
N.D. Ohio
District
Cephalon, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
Susanville
Susanville Elementary School District and
N.D. Ohio
CA
Elementary School
Lassen County Office of Education v.
1:22-op-45031
(Federal)
District
Ce halon, Inc., et al.
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County of Adams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
City and County of
Commissioners of The County of Boulder
N.D. Ohio
CO
Broomfield
City and County of Broomfield, City of
1:19-op-45036
(Federal)
Commerce City, City and County of
Denver, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Lorimer, City o North lenn, The Board
C-37
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller, City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County ofAdams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of Boulder
City and County of Broomfield, City of
City and County of
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
Denver
Denver, The Board of County
1:19-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Lorimer; City of *Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller, City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Conejos County; Las Animas County;
CO
City of Alamosa
Chaffee County; Otero County; Alamosa
1:18-op-45740
N.D. Ohio
County; and The City ofAlamosa v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County of Adams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of Boulder,
City and County of Broomfield, City of
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
City of Aurora
Denver, The Board of County
1:1.9-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Lorimer, City of Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller, City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County ofAdams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
CO
City of Black Hawk
Commissioners of The County of Boulder,
1:19-op-45036
N.D. Ohio
City and County of Broomfield, City of
(Federal)
Commerce City, City and County of
Denver, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County o
C-38
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Larimer, City of Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller, City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
CO
City of Brighton
City of Brighton v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45298
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County ofAdams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City ofAurora, City ofBlack
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of Boulder
City and County of Broomfield, City of
City of Commerce
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
City
Denver, The Board of County
1:19-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Larimer, City of *Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
CO
City of Federal
City of Federal Heights v. Purdue
1:19-op-45573
N.D. Ohio
Heights
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
CO
City of Greeley
City of Greeley v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45977
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
The City of Lakewood, and the City of
N.D. Ohio
CO
City of Lakewood
Wheat Ridge v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45800
(Federal)
al.
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County of Adams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of Boulder,
City and County of Broomfield, City of
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
City of Northglenn
Denver The Board of County
1:19-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Larimer, City of Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
CO
City of Sheridan
City of Sheridan v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45572
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
CO
City of Thornton
City of Thornton v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45034
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
C-39
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County of Adams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of Boulder,
City and County of Broomfield, City of
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
City of Westminster
Denver, The Board of County
1:19-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Larimer, City of Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller, City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The City of Lakewood, and the City of
N.D. Ohio
CO
City of Wheat Ridge
Wheat Ridge v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1: 1 8-op-45800
(Federal)
al.
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County ofAdams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City ofAurora, City ofBlack
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of Boulder
City and County of Broomfield, City of
County of Adams
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
(Board of County
Denver, The Board of County
1:1.9-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Larimer, City of Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Conejos County; Las Animas County;
CO
County of Alamosa
Chaffee County; Otero County; Alamosa
1:18-op-45740
N.D. Ohio
County; and The City ofAlamosa v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County of Adams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
County of Arapahoe
Commissioners of The County of Boulder
N.D. Ohio
CO
(Board of County
City and County of Broomfield, City of'
1:19-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Commerce City, City and County of
Denver The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Larimer, City o North rlenn, The Board
C-40
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller, City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County ofAdams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of'Black
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of Boulder
City and County of Broomfield, City of
County of Boulder
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
(Board of County
Denver, The Board of County
1:19-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Larimer, City of *Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller, City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Conejos County; Las Animas County;
CO
County of Chaffee
Chaffee County; Otero County; Alamosa
1:18-op-45740
N.D. Ohio
County; and The City ofAlamosa v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Conejos County; Las Animas County;
CO
County of Conejos
Chaffee County; Otero County; Alamosa
1:18-op-45740
N.D. Ohio
County; and The City ofAlamosa v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County of Adams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of Boulder,
City and County of Broomfield, City of
County of Fremont
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
(Board of County
Denver, The Board of County
1:19-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Larimer, City of Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller, City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
CO
County of Huerfano
County of Huerfano v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45168
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
County of Jefferson
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
CO
(Board of County
The County of Jefferson v. Purdue
1:19-op-45035
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Pharma L.P., et al.
C-41
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County ofAdams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of Boulder;
City and County of Broomfield, City of
County of Latimer
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
(Board of County
Denver, The Board of County
1:19-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town ofHudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Larimer; City of Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller; City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Conejos County; Las Animas County;
CO
County of Las
Chaffee County; Otero County; Alamosa
L18-op-45740
N.D. Ohio
Animas
County; and The City ofAlamosa v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
County of Mesa
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
CO
(Board of County
the County of Mesa v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45923
(Federal)
Commissioners)
L.P., et al.
Conejos County; Las Animas County;
CO
County of Otero
Chaffee County; Otero County; Alamosa
1:18-op-45740
N.D. Ohio
County; and The City ofAlamosa v.
(Federal)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
CO
County of Pueblo
Pueblo County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:1.8-op-45801
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County of Adams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County of Boulder,
City and County of Broomfield, City of
County of Teller
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
(Board of County
Denver, The Board of County
1:19-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Larimer; City of Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller, City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Socorro Independent School District,
MDL - In re
Downey Unified School District, Kern
2020-70878 /
Texas Opioid
CO
Mesa County Valley
High School District, Waukegan
2018-63587
Litigation
School District 51
Community Unit School District, Bibb
(master) / 1:21-
(TX - 152nd
County School District, South Bend
op-45080
Judicial
Community School Corp., Mesa County
District of
C-42
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
Harris
Unified School District, Smith -Green
County)
Community Schools, School City of
(State MDL)
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
/ N.D. Ohio
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
(Federal)
KY, and City of Mt. Washington, KY v.
AbbVie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
Independent School Dist., Irving
Independent School District, Socorro
Independent School District, Downey
Unified School District, Kern High School
District, Waukegan Community Unit
School District, Bibb County School
District, South Bend Community School
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
The Board of County Commissioners of
The County of Adams, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Arapahoe, City of Aurora, City of Black
Hawk, The Board of County
Commissioners of The County ofBoulder,
City and County of Broomfield, City of
Commerce City, City and County of
N.D. Ohio
CO
Town of Hudson
Denver, The Board of County
1:1.9-op-45036
(Federal)
Commissioners of The County of
Fremont, Town of Hudson, The Board of
County Commissioners of The County of
Lorimer, City of Northglenn, The Board
of County Commissioners of The County
of Teller, City of Westminster, and Tri-
County Health Department v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
The City of Ansonia, The City of Danbury,
X07 HUD CV
(CT -
Superior
CT
City of Ansonia
The City of Derby and The City of
17 6086134 S
Court,
Norwalk v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(consolidated)
Judicial
District of
Hartford)
State MDL
The City of Ansonia, The City of Danbury,
X07 HUD CV
MDL - In re
Opioid
CT
City of Danbury
The City of Derby and The City of
17 6086134 S
Litigation
Norwalk v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(consolidated)
(CT -
C-43
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Superior
Court,
Judicial
District of
Hartford)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
The City of Ansonia, The City of Danbury,
X07 HHD CV
(CT -
Superior
CT
City of Derby
The City of Derby and The City of
17 6086134 S
Court,
Norwalk v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(consolidated)
Judicial
District of
Hartford)
State MDL
CT
City of Middletown
City of Middletown v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45651
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
City of New London v. Purdue Pharma
X07 HHD CV
(CT -
Superior
CT
City of New London
L.P., et al.
17 6086134 S
Court,
(consolidated)
Judicial
District of
Hartford)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
The City of Ansonia, The City of Danbury,
X07 HHD CV
(CT -
Superior
CT
City of Norwalk
The City of Derby and The City of
17 6086134 S
Court,
Norwalk v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(consolidated)
Judicial
District of
Hartford)
State MDL)
CT
City of Norwich
City of Norwich v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45840
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
CT
Town of Enfield
Town ofEnfield v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45581
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
CT
Town of Monroe
The Town of Monroe, Connecticut v.
1:19-op-45441
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MDL - In re
Opioid
X07 HHD CV
Litigation
CT
Town of
Town of Wallingford v. Purdue Pharma
17 60861.34 S
(CT -
Wallingford
L.P., et al
(consolidated)
Superior
Court,
Judicial
District of
C-44
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Hartford)
State MDL
CT
Town of
Town of Wethersfield v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45663
N.D. Ohio
Wethersfield
L.P., et al.
Federal
CT
Town of Windham
Town of Windham v. Teva
1:20-op-45103
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
DE - Superior
City of Dover, City of Seaford and Kent
Court of the
DE
City of Dover
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
K19C-06-022
State of
Delaware
State
DE - Superior
City of Dover, City of Seaford and Kent
Court of the
DE
City of Seaford
County v. Purdue Pharrna L.P., et al.
K19C-06-022
State of
Delaware
(State)
DE - Superior
DE
County of Kent
City of Dover, City of Seaford and Kent
K19C-06-022
Court of the
State of
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Delaware
State
DE
County of Sussex
Sussex County, Delaware v. Purdue
1:19-op-45723
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Florida Health Sciences Center, Inc.,
North Broward Hospital District, Halifax
Hospital Medical Center, Bayfront HMA
Medical Center, LLC, CGHHospital,
Ltd., Citrus HMA, LLC, Central Florida
Health, Crestview Hospital Corporation,
Delray Medical Center, Inc., Flagler
Hospital, Inc., Good Samaritan Medical
Center, Inc., Haines City HMA, LLC
Hernando HMA, LLC, Hialeah Hospital,
Inc., HMA Santa Rosa Medical Center,
LLC Key West HMA, LLC, Lake Shore
FL - 17th
HMA, LLC, Lake Wales Hospital
Judicial
FL
Halifax Hospital
Corporation, Larkin Community Hospital
CACE-19-
Circuit Court
Medical Center
Palm Springs Campus, LLC Larkin
018882
of Broward
Community Hospital, Inc., Larkin
County
Community Hospital Behavioral Service,
(State)
Inc., Leesburg Regional Medical Center,
Inc., Lifemark Hospitals Of Florida, Inc.,
Live Oak HMA, LLC, Naples HMA, LLC,
North Shore Medical Center, Inc.,
Osceolasc LLC Palm Beach Gardens
Community Hospital, Inc., Port Charlotte
HMA, LLC, Punta Gorda HMA, LLC St.
Mary's Medical Center, Inc., Starke HMA,
LLC The Villages Tri-County Medical
Center, Inc., and Venice HMA, LLC v.
Richard Sackler, et al.
C-45
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
FL
Lee Memorial
Health System d/b/a
Lee Memorial Health System v. Actavis
1:21-op-45092
N.D. Ohio
Lee Health
LLC, et al.
(Federal)
Florida Health Sciences Center, Inc.,
North Broward Hospital District, Halifax
Hospital Medical Center, Bayfront HMA
Medical Center, LLC, CGH Hospital,
Ltd., Citrus HMA, LLC, Central Florida
Health, Crestview Hospital Corporation,
Delray Medical Center, Inc., Flagler
Hospital, Inc., Good Samaritan Medical
Center, Inc., Haines City HMA, LLC
Hernando HMA, LLC, Hialeah Hospital,
Inc., HMA Santa Rosa Medical Center,
LLC, Key West HMA, LLC, Lake Shore
FL - 17th
HMA, LLC, Lake Wales Hospital
Judicial
FL
North Broward
Corporation, Larkin Community Hospital
LACE-19-
Circuit Court
Hospital District
Palm Springs Campus, LLC Larkin
018882
of Broward
Community Hospital, Inc., Larkin
County
Community Hospital Behavioral Service,
(State)
Inc., Leesburg Regional Medical Center,
Inc., Lifemark Hospitals Of Florida, Inc.,
Live Oak HMA, LLC, Naples HMA, LLC,
North Shore Medical Center, Inc.,
Osceolasc LLC, Palm Beach Gardens
Community Hospital, Inc., Port Charlotte
HMA, LLC Punta Gorda HMA, LLC St.
Mary's Medical Center, Inc., Starke HMA,
LLC The Villages Tri-County Medical
Center, Inc., and Venice HMA, LLC v.
Richard Sackler, et al.
FL
Putnam County
Putnam County School Board v.
1:22-op-45025
N.D. Ohio
School Board
Ce halon, Inc., et al.
Federal
Sarasota County
Public Hospital
FL
District d/b/a
Sarasota County Public Hospital District
1:18-op-46136
N.D. Ohio
Memorial
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Healthcare System,
Inc.
FL
School Board of
The School Board of Miami -Dade v.
1:19-op-45913
N.D. Ohio
Miami -Dade
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
FL
South Florida
Behavioral Health
South Florida Behavioral Health Network
1:19-op-46070
N.D. Ohio
Network
v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
Socorro Independent School District,
MDL - In re
Downey Unified School District, Kern
Texas Opioid
High School District, Waukegan
2020-70878 /
Litigation
Bibb County School
Community Unit School District, Bibb
2018-63587
(TX - 152nd
GA
District
County School District, South Bend
(master) / 1:21-
Judicial
Community School Corp., Mesa County
op-45080
District of
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
Harris
Unified School District, Smith -Green
County)
Community Schools, School City o
State MDL
C-46
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
/ N.D. Ohio
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
(Federal)
KY, and City of Mt. Washington, KY v.
AbbVie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
Independent School Dist., Irving
Independent School District, Socorro
Independent School District, Downey
Unified School District, Kern High School
District, Waukegan Community Unit
School District, Bibb County School
District, South Bend Community School
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
Chatham County
Chatham County Hospital Authority,
N.D. Ohio
Hospital Authority
p y
Georg ia v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:19-op-45725
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
GA
City of Adel
City of Adel, Georgia v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45318
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
City of Albany
The City ofAlbany v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46337
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
City ofAlma, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Alma
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45620
(Federal)
al.
The City of Blakely; the City of Arlington;
GA
City of Arlington
the City ofDamascus v.
1:19-op-45129
N.D. Ohio
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
GA
City of Atlanta
The City of Atlanta v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-46308
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
City of Augusta
Augusta, Georgia v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45233
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
The City of Bainbridge, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Bainbridge
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45383
(Federal)
al.
GA
City of Blackshear
City of Blackshear v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45802
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
The City of Blakely; the City of Arlington;
GA
City of Blakely
the City of Damascus v.
1:19-op-45129
N.D. Ohio
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
City of Brunswick, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Brunswick
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45270
(Federal)
al.
City ofRome, Floyd County, Chattooga
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Cartersville
County, Whitefield County and City of
1: 1 8-op-45282
(Federal)
Cartersville v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
C-47
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Columbus, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Columbus
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45567
(Federal)
al.
The City of Blakely; the City of Arlington;
GA
City of Damascus
the City of Damascus v.
1:19-op-45129
N.D. Ohio
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
GA
City of Dawson
City of Dawson, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45619
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Demorest, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Demorest
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46113
(Federal)
al.
GA
City of Doraville
The City of Doraville, Georgia v. Teva
1:19-op-46056
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
GA
City of Dunwoody
The City ofDunwoody, Georgia v. Teva
1:19-op-46054
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
The City of Fitzgerald, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Fitzgerald
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45603
(Federal)
al.
The City of Gainesville, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Gainesville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45486
(Federal)
al.
GA
City of Lakeland
City of Lakeland, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45618
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of
The City of Milledgeville, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Milledgeville
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45495
(Federal)
GA
City of Nashville
City of Nashville, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45617
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Pooler, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Pooler
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45391
(Federal)
al
City of Richmond
City of Richmond Hill, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Hill
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45305
(Federal)
City of Rome, Floyd County, Chattooga
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Rome
County, Whitefeld County and City of
1:18-op-45282
(Federal)
Cartersville v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
City of Sandy
The City of Sandy Springs, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Springs
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45516
(Federal)
The Mayor and Alderman of the City of
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Savannah
Savannah v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:18-op-45550
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
GA
City of Springfield
City of Springfield, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45199
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
The City of Tifton, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Tifton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45454
(Federal)
al.
GA
City of Warwick
City of Warwick, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45621
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
The City of Woodbury v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
City of Woodbury
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45575
(Federal)
al.
Clinch County
Clinch County Hospital Authority v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Hospital Authority
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45453
(Federal)
GA
County of Appling
Appling County, Georgia v. Teva
1:20-op-45081
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
County of Athens-
The Unified Government of Athens -Clarke
N.D. Ohio
GA
Clarke (Unified
County, Georgia v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45218
(Federal)
Government)
Drug Corporation, et al.
GA
County of Atkinson
Atkinson County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45118
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Bacon County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Bacon
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46105
(Federal)
al.
Banks County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Banks
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45378
(Federal)
al.
Bartow County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Bartow
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45045
(Federal)
al.
Ben Hill County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Ben Hill
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45505
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Berrien
Berrien County, Georgia v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-45834
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Brantley County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Brantley
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45714
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Brooks
Brooks County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:18-op-45981
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Bulloch County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Bulloch
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45394
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Burke
Burke County, Georgia v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45207
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Butts County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Butts
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45490
(Federal)
al.
Camden County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Camden
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45717
(Federal)
al.
Candler County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Candler
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45165
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Carroll
Carroll County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-46269
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
GA
County of Catoosa
Catoosa County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:18-op-45497
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Charlton County v. Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Charlton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45713
(Federal)
al.
C-49
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Chatham County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Chatham
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45267
(Federal)
al.
County of
City of Rome, Floyd County, Chattooga
N.D. Ohio
GA
Chattooga
County, Whitefield County and City of
1: 1 8-op-45282
(Federal)
Cartersville v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
GA
County of Cherokee
Cherokee County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45174
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Clay
Clay County, Georgia v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45194
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Clayton
Clayton County, Georgia v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-46298
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Clinch
Clinch County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45197
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Cobb
Cobb County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45817
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
Columbia County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Columbia
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45607
(Federal)
al.
Cook County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Cook
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45284
(Federal)
al.
Crisp County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Crisp
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45238
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Dade
Dade County, Georgia v. Teva
1:19-op-46099
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Dawson
Dawson County, Georgia v. Purdue
19-op-45210
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Decatur County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Decatur
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45334
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of DeKalb
DeKalb County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:18-op-45503
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Dooly County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Dooly
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45712
(Federal)
al.
County of
Dougherty County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Dougherty
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45491
(Federal)
GA
County of Early
Early County, Georgia v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45180
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Echols
Echols County, Georgia v. Purdue
18-op-46204
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of
Effingham County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45178
N.D. Ohio
Effingham
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Elbert County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Elbert
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45381
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Emanuel
Emanuel County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45209
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Evans
Evans County, Georgia v. Teva
1:20-op-45080
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
C-50
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
GA
County of Fannin
County of Fannin v. Rite Aid of Georgia,
1:19-op-45269
N.D. Ohio
Inc., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Fayette
Fayette County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45293
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Rome, Floyd County, Chattooga
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Floyd
County, Whitefield County and City of
1: 1 8-op-45282
(Federal)
Cartersville v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
GA
County of Forsyth
Forsyth County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45420
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Fulton
County of *Fulton v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
18-op-45374
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
GA
County of Glascock
Glascock County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45175
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Glynn
Glynn County, Georgia v. Purdue Pharma
18-op-46115
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Grady
Grady County, Georgia v. Purdue
18-op-46338
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Greene
Greene County, Georgia v. Purdue
19-op-45203
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Gwinnett
Gwinnett County, Georgia v. Purdue
18-op-45758
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
County of
Habersham County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Habersham
al erisoureeBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45559
(Federal)
Hall County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Hall
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45286
(Federal)
al.
Hancock County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Hancock
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45535
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Heard
Heard County v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45130
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
GA
County of Henry
Henry County, Georgia v. Purdue
18-op-46310
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
GA
County of Houston
Houston County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
18-op-45946
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
Irwin County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Irwin
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45283
(Federal)
al.
Jackson County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Jackson
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45581
(Federal)
al.
Jasper County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Jasper
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45504
(Federal)
al.
County of Jeff
Jeff Davis County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Davis
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45237
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Jefferson
Jefferson County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45201
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Johnson County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Johnson
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45716
(Federal)
al.
C-51
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Jones County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Jones
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45424
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Lanier
Lanier County, Georgia v. Purdue
18-op-46066
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Laurens County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Laurens
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45945
(Federal)
al.
Lee County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Lee
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-46171
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Liberty
Liberty County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45200
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Lincoln County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Lincoln
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45508
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Long
Long County, Georgia v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45196
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Lowndes
Lowndes County, Georgia v. Purdue
18-op-45835
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Lumpkin
Lumpkin County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45211
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
The County of Macon, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Macon
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45577
(Federal)
al.
Madison County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Madison
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45296
(Federal)
al.
McDuffie County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of McDuffie
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45509
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of McIntosh
McIntosh County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45173
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
GA
County of
Meriwether County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45305
N.D. Ohio
Meriwether
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Monroe County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Monroe
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45672
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of
Montgomery County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45292
N.D. Ohio
Montgomery
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Newton County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Newton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45578
(Federal)
al.
Oconee County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Oconee
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45219
(Federal)
al.
County of
Oglethorpe County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Oglethorpe
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45262
(Federal)
The County ofPeach, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Peach
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45579
(Federal)
al.
C-52
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Pierce County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Pierce
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46107
(Federal)
al.
Pike County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Pike
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45179
(Federal)
al.
Polk County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Polk
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45046
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Pulaski
Pulaski County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45176
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al
Federal
GA
County of Rabun
Rabun County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45177
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Randolph
Randolph County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45202
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Rockdale
Rockdale County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:18-op-46296
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
The County of Schley, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Schley
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45580
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Screven
Screven County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45198
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Seminole
Seminole County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45181
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Spalding
Spalding County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45208
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Stephens
Stephens County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45195
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Sumter County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Sumter
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45250
(Federal)
al.
Taliaferro County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Taliaferro
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45562
(Federal)
al.
Tattnall County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Tattnall
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45574
(Federal)
al.
Toombs County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Toombs
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45576
(Federal)
al.
GA
County of Towns
Towns County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45172
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Troup County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Troup
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45715
(Federal)
al.
Twiggs County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Twiggs
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45379
(Federal)
al.
Union County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Union
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46284
(Federal)
al.
C-53
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Walton County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Walton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45297
(Federal)
al.
Warren County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Warren
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45425
(Federal)
al.
County of
Washington County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Washington
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45563
(Federal)
GA
County of Wayne
Wayne County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45204
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
County of
City of Rome, Floyd County, Chattooga
N.D. Ohio
GA
Whitefield
County, Whitefield County and City of
1:18-op-45282
(Federal)
Cartersville v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
GA
County of Wilcox
The County of Wilcox, Georgia v. Purdue
1:18-op-45506
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
GA
County of Wilkes
Wilkes County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45171
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
County of
Wilkinson County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Wilkinson
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45671
(Federal)
Worth County, Georgia v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
County of Worth
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45602
(Federal)
al.
Dodge County
Dodge County Hospital Authority d/b/a
GA
Hospital Authority
Dodge County Hospital v.
1: 1 8-op-45830
N.D. Ohio
d/b/a Dodge County
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
Hos ital
al.
Habersham County
Habersham County Medical Center v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Medical Center
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-46114
(Federal)
Hospital Authority
Hospital Authority of Bainbridge and
GA
of Bainbridge and
Decatur County, Georgia v.
18-op-45382
N.D. Ohio
Decatur County
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
Hospital Authority
of Baxley County
Hospital Authority of Baxley and Appling
N.D. Ohio
GA
and Appling County
County v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:1.8-op-46157
(Federal)
d/b/a Appling
Corporation, et al.
Health Care System
Hospital Authority
of Bleckley County
Hospital Authority of Bleckley County v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
d/b/a Bleckley
AmerisourceBergen
erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46170
(Federal)
Memorial Hospital
l
Macon -Bibb County
The Unified Government of Macon -Bibb
N.D. Ohio
GA
(Unified
County, Georgia v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45407
(Federal)
Government
DrugCorporation, et al.
Sheriff of Appling
Mark Melton in his official capacity as the
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
Sheriff of Appling County, Georgia v.
1:19-op-45307
(Federal)
Mark Melton)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Baldwin
William C. Massee, Jr. in his official
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
capacity as the Sheriff of Baldwin County,
1:19-op-45361
(Federal)
Georgia v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
C-54
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
William C. Massee,
Jr.
Sheriff of Bibb
David J. Davis, in his of capacity as
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
Sheriff of Bibb County, Georgia v. Purdue
1:19-op-45360
(Federal)
David J. Davis)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Coffee
Doyle T. Wooten, in his official capacity
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
as the Sheriff of Coffee County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45145
(Federal)
Doyle T. Wooten)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Crawford
Lewis S. Walker, in his official capacity as
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
the Sheriff of Crawford County v. Purdue
19-op-45146
(Federal)
Lewis S. Walker)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Crisp
H. W. 'Billy"Hancock, in his official
GA
County (Sheriff
"Billy"
capacity as the Sheriff of Crisp County,
1: 19-op-45 562
N.D. Ohio
H.W.
Georgia v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Hancock)
Sheriff of Glynn
E. Neal Jump, in his official capacity as
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff E.
the Sheriff of Glynn County v. Purdue
19-op-45155
(Federal)
Neal Jump)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Harris
Mike Jolley, in his of capacity as the
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
Sheriff of Harris County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45147
(Federal)
Mike Jolley)Pharma
L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Houston
Cullen Talton in his of capacity as
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
the Sheriff of Houston County, Georgia v.
1:19-op-45308
(Federal)
Cullen Talton
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Jeff Davis
Preston Bohannon, in his official capacity
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
as the Sheriff of Jeff Davis County v.
1:19-op-45161
(Federal)
Preston Bohannon)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Jones
R.N. "Butch" Reece, in his o zcial
of
GA
County (Sheriff
capacity as the Sher of Jones County v.
1:19-op-45162
N.D. Ohio
R.N. 'Butch"
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Reece)
Sheriff of Laurens
Larry H. Dean, in his official capacity as
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
the Sheriff of Laurens County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45163
(Federal)
Larry H. Dean)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of
Meriwether County
Chuck Smith in his official capacity as the
N.D. Ohio
GA
(Sheriff Chuck
Sheriff of Meriwether County, Georgia v.
1:1.9-op-45306
(Federal)
Smith
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Murray
Gary Langford, in his of capacity as
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
the Sheriff ofMurray County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45164
(Federal)
Gary Langford)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Oconee
Scott R. Berry, in his official capacity as
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
the Sheriff of Oconee County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45165
(Federal)
Scott R. Berry)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Peach
Terry Deese in his official capacity as the
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
Sheriff of Peach County, Georgia v.
1:19-op-45314
(Federal)
Terry Deese)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Pierce
Ramsey Bennett, in his official capacity as
'of
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
the Sheriff Pierce County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45166
(Federal)
Rainsey Bennett)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Screven
Mike Kile, in his official capacity as the
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
Sheriff of Screven County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45167
(Federal)
Mike Kite)
Pharma L.P., et al.
C-55
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Sheriff of Telfair
Chris Steverson in his official capacity as
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
the Sheriff of Telfair County, Georgia v.
1:19-op-45313
(Federal)
Chris Steverson)
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Tift
Gene Scarbrough, in his official capacity
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
as the Sheriff of Tift County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45168
(Federal)
Gene Scarbrough)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Ware
Randy F. Royal, in his official capacity as
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
the Sheriff of Ware County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45169
(Federal)
Randy F. Royal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Sheriff of Wayne
John G. Carter, in his official capacity as
N.D. Ohio
GA
County (Sheriff
the Sheriff of Wayne County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45170
(Federal)
John G. Carter)
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Candler County
The Candler County Hospital Authority v.
N.D. Ohio
GA
Hospital Authority
AmerisoureeBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45167
(Federal)
al.
The Hospital
Authority of
Valdosta County
The Hospital Authority of Valdosta and
GA
and Lowndes
Lowndes County, Georgia dlb/a South
1:19-op-45133
N.D. Ohio
County d/b/a South
Georgia Medical Center v. Purdue
(Federal)
Georgia Medical
Pharma L.P., et al.
Center
GA
The Hospital
Authority of Wayne
The Hospital Authority of Wayne County,
1:19-op-45278
N.D. Ohio
Count
Georgia v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
HI
County of Hawaii
County of Hawaii v. Purdue Pharma
1:20-op-45014
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
HI
County of Kauai
County of Kauai v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45862
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Adair
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:1.8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Adams
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
C-56
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
IA
County of
Allamakee County v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45983
N.D. Ohio
Allamakee
L.P., et al.
Federal
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Appanoose
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Alley an ple, et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Audubon
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:1.8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Benton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
C-57
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Black Hawk County, Des Moines County,
County of Black
Harrison County, Howard County, Jasper
N.D. Ohio
IA
Hawk
County, Lyon County, Mills County, Tama
1: 1 8-op-45303
(Federal)
County, Union County, and Worth County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Bremer
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Buchanan
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:1.8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
County of Buena
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
N.D. Ohio
IA
Vista
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
C-58
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Calhoun
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Carroll
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:1.8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Cedar
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
C-59
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Cerro
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Gordo
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Cherokee
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Alley an ple, et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Chickasaw
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Clay
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Clayton
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
C-60
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Clinton
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Dallas
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
IA
County of Delaware
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
1:18-op-45122
N.D. Ohio
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
(Federal)
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
C-61
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Black Hawk County, Des Moines County,
County of Des
Harrison County, Howard County, Jasper
N.D. Ohio
IA
Moines
County, Lyon County, Mills County, Tama
1:18-op-45303
(Federal)
County, Union County, and Worth County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Emmet
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an ple, et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Fayette
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:1.8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Fremont
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Hamilton
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
C-62
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Hancock
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Hardin
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:1.8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Black Hawk County, Des Moines County,
Harrison County, Howard County, Jasper
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Harrison
County, Lyon County, Mills County, Tama
1:18-op-45303
(Federal)
County, Union County, and Worth County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
IA
County of Henry
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
(Federal)
Madison County, Muscatine County,
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
C-63
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Black Hawk County, Des Moines County,
Harrison County, Howard County, Jasper
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Howard
County, Lyon County, Mills County, Tama
1: 1 8-op-45303
(Federal)
County, Union County, and Worth County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Humboldt
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Ida
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Black Hawk County, Des Moines County,
Harrison County, Howard County, Jasper
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Jasper
County, Lyon County, Mills County, Tama
1:18-op-45303
(Federal)
County, Union County, and Worth County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Johnson
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
C-64
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Jones
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Keokuk
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Alley an ple, et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Lee
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:1.8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Black Hawk County, Des Moines County,
Harrison County, Howard County, Jasper
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Lyon
County, Lyon County, Mills County, Tama
1:1.8-op-45303
(Federal)
County, Union County, and Worth County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Madison
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allergan plc, et al.
C-65
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Mahaska
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Marion
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Black Hawk County, Des Moines County,
Harrison County, Howard County, Jasper
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Mills
County, Lyon County, Mills County, Tama
1:18-op-45303
(Federal)
County, Union County, and Worth County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Mitchell
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
C-66
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Monroe
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County of
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
Montgomery
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1: 1 8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Muscatine
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
IA
County of O'Brien
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
1:18-op-45122
N.D. Ohio
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
(Federal)
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
C-67
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Osceola
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Plymouth
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1: 1 8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Pocahontas
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
IA
County of Polk
Polk County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:18-op-45116
N.D. Ohio
Federal
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
IA
County of
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
1:18-op-45122
N.D. Ohio
Pottawattamie
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
(Federal)
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Poweshiek
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Alley an ple, et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Sac
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:1.8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Scott
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
C-69
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Shelby
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Sioux
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1: 1 8-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Black Hawk County, Des Moines County,
Harrison County, Howard County, Jasper
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Tama
County, Lyon County, Mills County, Tama
1:18-op-45303
(Federal)
County, Union County, and Worth County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Taylor
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
C-70
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Black Hawk County, Des Moines County,
Harrison County, Howard County, Jasper
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Union
County, Lyon County, Mills County, Tama
1: 1 8-op-45303
(Federal)
County, Union County, and Worth County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of Webster
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
IA
County of
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Winnebago
Madison County, Muscatine County,
(Federal)
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Allen an p1c, et al.
Adair County, Adams County, Audubon
County, Benton County, Bremer County,
Buchanan County, Buena Vista County,
Calhoun County, Carroll County, Cedar
County, Clay County, Clayton County,
Clinton County, Dallas County, Delaware
County, Fayette County, Hamilton
County of
County, Hardin County, Humboldt
N.D. Ohio
IA
Winneshiek
County, Johnson County, Lee County,
1:18-op-45122
(Federal)
Mahaska County, Marion County,
Mitchell County, Monroe County,
Montgomery County, O'Brien County,
Plymouth County, Pottawattamie County,
Sac County, Scott County, Shelby County,
Sioux County, Taylor County, and
Winneshiek County v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Black Hawk County, Des Moines County,
Harrison County, Howard County, Jasper
N.D. Ohio
IA
County of Worth
County, Lyon County, Mills County, Tama
1:18-op-45303
(Federal)
County, Union County, and Worth County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
IA
County of Wright
Appanoose County, Cerro Gordo County,
1:21-op-45051
N.D. Ohio
Cherokee County, Chickasaw County,
Federal
C-71
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Emmet County, Fremont County,
Hancock County, Henry County, Ida
County, Jones County, Keokuk County,
Madison County, Muscatine County,
Osceola County, Pocahontas County,
Poweshiek County, Webster County,
Winnebago County, and Wright County v.
Alley an p1c, et al.
ID
City of Boise
City of Boise v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-46289
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
ID
City of Cubbuek
City of Cubbuek v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45729
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
ID
City of Pocatello
City of Pocatello v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45578
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
ID
City of Preston
City of Preston v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45067
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
ID
City of Twin Falls
City of Twin Falls v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45743
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
ID
County of Ada
Ada County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45775
N.D. Ohio
Federal
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of Adams
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1:18-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
ID
County of Bannock
Bannock County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45359
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
ID
County of Bingham
Bingham County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45758
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of Blaine
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1:18-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of Boise
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1:18-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1:18-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Bonneville
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
ID
County of Camas
Camas County, Idaho v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45407
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
ID
County of Canyon
Canyon County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1: 1 8-op-46277
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
C-72
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of Caribou
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1: 1 8-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of Cassia
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1:18-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of Elmore
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1:18-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
ID
County of Gooding
Gooding County, Idaho v. Purdue
1:19-op-45404
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of Latah
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1:18-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of Minidoka
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1:18-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of Owyhee
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1:18-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Adams County, Blaine County, Boise
County, Bonneville County, Caribou
ID
County of Payette
County, Cassia County, Elmore County,
1:18-op-46062
N.D. Ohio
Latah County, Minidoka County, Owyhee
(Federal)
County and Payette County v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
ID
County of Twin
Twin Falls County, Idaho v. Purdue
1:19-op-45828
N.D. Ohio
Falls
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Board of Education
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
N.D. Ohio
IL
of East Aurora,
School District, Mason County Public
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
School District 131
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
C-73
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD) H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Board of Education
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
of Joliet Township
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
N.D. Ohio
IL
High School,
District 86, Fayette County Public
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
District 204
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
C-74
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
Board of Education
County Public Schools, Estill County
of Thornton
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
N.D. Ohio
IL
Fractional Township
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
High Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
District 215
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
C-75
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Board of Education
Public Schools, Martin County Public
of Thornton
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Township High
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Schools, District
County Public Schools, Bangor School
205
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
C-76
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Village of Melrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
City of Berwyn
of Hillside, City of Northlake, Village of
1:18-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City of Pekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
IL
City of Chicago
City of Chicago v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:14-cv-04361
N.D. Illinois
et al.
Federal
Village ofMelrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
City of Chicago
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
Heights
of Hillside, City of Northlake, Village of
1:18-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City of Pekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
MDL - In re
Opioid
City of Granite City, IL v.
Litigation (IL
IL
City of Granite City
AmerisoureeBergen Drug Corporation, et
2018-L-010351
- Circuit
Court of
al.
Cook
County)
State MDL
IL
City of Harrisburg
City of Harrisburg, Illinois v. Purdue
1:18-op-45594
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
Dolton, Village of Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
IL
City of Harvey
Merrionette Park, Village of North
1:18-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
(Federal)
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
IL
City of Herrin
City of Herrin, Illinois, a home rule unit v.
1:20-op-45192
N.D. Ohio
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
Village ofAddison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
N.D. Ohio
IL
City of Kankakee
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
Village ofLa Grange Park, Village of
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City o
C-77
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
IL
City of Marion
City ofMarion, Illinois v. Teva
1:20-op-45215
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of Metropolis, Illinois V.
N.D. Ohio
IL
City of Metropolis
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45537
(Federal)
al.
Village of Melrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
City of Northlake
of Hillside, City of Northlake, Village of
1: 1 8-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City of Pekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Village ofMelrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
City of Pekin
of Hillside, City of Northlake, Village of
1:18-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City of Pekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
Dolton, Village of Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
IL
City of Peoria
Merrionette Park, Village of North
1:18-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
(Federal)
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
IL
City of Princeton
City of Princeton, Illinois v. Purdue
1:18-op-45599
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
IL
City of Rockford
City of Rockford v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45309
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
Village ofAddison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
City of Streator
Village ofLa Grange Park, Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
IL
City of West
City of West Frankfort, Illinois v. Teva
1:20-op-45191
N.D. Ohio
Frankfort
Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., et al.
Federal
The People of the State oflllinois, the
IL
County of
People ofAlexander County, and County
1:17-op-45050
N.D. Ohio
Alexander
of Alexander v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
IL
County of Bond
The People of the State oflllinois, The
1:18-op-45004
N.D. Ohio
People o Bond County, and County of
Federal
C-78
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Bond v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
Cor oration, et al.
The People of the State oflllinois, The
N.D. Ohio
IL
County of Calhoun
People of Calhoun County, and County of
1: 1 8-op-46294
(Federal)
Calhoun v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
The People of the State oflllinois, The
IL
County of Christian
People of Christian County, and County
17-op-45078
N.D. Ohio
of Christian v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Cor oration, et al.
The People of the State oflllinois, The
IL
County of Coles
People of Coles County, and County of
1:18-op-45138
N.D. Ohio
Coles v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
The People of The State oflllinois, The
IL
County of Edwards
People of Edwards County, and The
18-op-45049
N.D. Ohio
County of Edwards v. AmerisourceBergen
(Federal)
Drug Corporation, et al.
The People of The State oflllinois, The
County of
People of Effingham County, and The
N.D. Ohio
IL
Effingham
County of Effingham v.
1: 1 8-op-45499
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
The People of the State of Illinois, The
IL
County of Franklin
People of'Franklin County, and County of
1:20-op-45194
N.D. Ohio
Franklin v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
The People of the State of Illinois, The
IL
County of Gallatin
People of Gallatin County, and County of
17-op-45152
N.D. Ohio
Gallatin v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
The People of the State oflllinois, The
IL
County of Hamilton
People of Hamilton County, and County
1:17-op-45157
N.D. Ohio
ofHamilton v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
The People of the State oflllinois, The
IL
County of Hardin
People of Hardin County, and County of
1:18-op-45003
N.D. Ohio
Hardin v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
The People of The State of Illinois, The
IL
County of Jasper
People ofJasper County, and The County
1:18-op-45026
N.D. Ohio
of Jasper v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
The People of The State oflllinois, The
IL
County of Jefferson
People of Jefferson County, and The
1:18-op-45539
N.D. Ohio
County of Jefferson v. AmerisourceBergen
(Federal)
Drug Corporation, et al.
MDL - In re
The People of the State oflllinois, The
Opioid
Litigation (IL
IL
County of Jersey
People of Jersey County, and Jersey
2018-L-003908
- Circuit
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Court of
Cook
C-79
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
County)
State MDL
The People of the State oflllinois, The
N.D. Ohio
IL
County of Johnson
People of Johnson County and County of
I :18-op-46148
(Federal)
Johnson v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
MDL - In re
Opioid
The People of the State oflllinois and
Litigation (IL
IL
County of LaSalle
LaSalle County, Illinois v. Purdue
2019-L-008722
- Circuit
Court of
Pharma L.P., et al.
Cook
County)
State MDL
The People of The State oflllinois, The
People ofLawrence County, and The
N.D. Ohio
IL
County of Lawrence
County of Lawrence v.
1:18-op-45518
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
The People of'The State of Illinois, The
IL
County of Lee
People of Lee County, and The County of
1: 1 8-op-45606
N.D. Ohio
Lee v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
The People of The State of Illinois, The
County of
People of Livingston County, and The
N.D. Ohio
IL
Livingston
County of Livingston v.
1:18-op-45527
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
The People of The State oflllinois, The
IL
County of Marion
People of Marion County, and The
1:18-op-45532
N.D. Ohio
County of Marion v. AmerisourceBergen
(Federal)
Drug Corporation, et al.
The People of The State oflllinois, The
IL
County of Massac
People of Massac County, and The
1:1.8-op-45519
N.D. Ohio
County ofMassac v. AmerisourceBergen
(Federal)
Drug Corporation, et al.
MDL - In re
Opioid
The People of the State oflllinois and
Litigation (IL
IL
County of McLean
McLean County, Illinois v. Purdue
2019-L-013365
- Circuit
Court of
Pharma L.P., et al.
Cook
County)
State MDL)
The People of the State oflllinois, The
IL
County of Pulaski
People of Pulaski County, and County of
1:17-op-45158
N.D. Ohio
Pulaski v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
The People of The State of Illinois, The
IL
County of Saline
People of Saline County, and The County
1:18-op-45528
N.D. Ohio
ofSaline v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
IL
County of
The People of the State Oflllinois, The
1:20-op-45154
N.D. Ohio
Sangamon
People of Sangamon County, and County
Federal
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
of Sangamon v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
USA, Inc., et al.
The People of The State of Illinois, The
IL
County of Schuyler
People of Schuyler County, and The
1: 1 8-op-46147
N.D. Ohio
County of Schuyler v. Purdue Pharma
(Federal)
L.P., et al.
The People of The State of Illinois, The
IL
County of Shelby
People of Shelby County, and The County
1: 1 8-op-45007
N.D. Ohio
of Shelby v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Cor oration, et al.
The People of the State oflllinois, The
N.D. Ohio
IL
County of Union
People of Union County, and Union
1:19-op-45286
(Federal)
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
The People of the State of Illinois, The
IL
County of Wabash
People of Wabash County, and County of
1:17-op-45103
N.D. Ohio
Wabash v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
The People of the State of Illinois, The
County of
People of Washington County, and
N.D. Ohio
IL
Washington
Washington County v.
1:17-op-45151
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
The People of The State of Illinois, The
IL
County of White
People of White County, and The County
1: 1 8-op-45024
N.D. Ohio
of White v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
The People of the State of Illinois, The
County of
People of Winnebago County, and the
N.D. Ohio
IL
Winnebago
County of Winnebago v.
1:18-op-45310
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
IL - Circuit
IL
Illinois Public Risk
Illinois Public Risk Fund v. Purdue
2019 CH 05847
Court of
Fund
Pharma L.P., et al.
Cook County
State
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
Dolton, Village of Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
IL
Orland Fire
Merrionette Park, Village of North
1:18-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Protection District
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
(Federal)
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
The Board of
Education of the
The Board of Education of the City of
IL
City of Chicago,
Chicago, School District No. 299
1:19-op-46042
N.D. Ohio
School District No.
("Chicago Public Schools') v. Teva
(Federal)
299
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Village ofAddison, Village of Bensenville,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Village of Addison
Village of Bolingbrook, Village ofForest
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
Park, Village o Franklin Park, Village o
C-81
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
Village ofLa Grange Park, Village of
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
Village of Melrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
Village of Bellwood
of Hillside, City ofNorthlake, Village of
1:18-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City of Pekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Village ofAddison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Village of
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Bensenville
Village ofLa Grange Park, Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
Village ofMelrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
Village of Berkeley
of Hillside, City ofNorthlake, Village of
1:18-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City of Pekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Village ofAddison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Village of
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Bolingbrook
Village ofLa Grange Park Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
Dolton, Village of Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
IL
Village of
Merrionette Park, Village of North
1:1.8-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Broadview
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
(Federal)
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
N.D. Ohio
IL
Ride
g
Dolton, Village ofHoffman Estates,
1:18-op-46335
Federal
( )
Village of Maywood, Village of
Merrionette Park, Village o North
C-82
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
Dolton, Village of'Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
IL
Village of Dolton
Merrionette Park, Village of North
1:18-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
(Federal)
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Village ofAddison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Village of Forest
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Park
Village ofLa Grange Park, Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
Village ofAddison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Village of Franklin
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Park
Village ofLa Grange Park Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
Village ofAddison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Village of Harwood
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Heights
Village ofLa Grange Park, Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
Village ofMelrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
Village of Hillside
of Hillside, City of Northlake, Village of
1:18-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City of Pekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
IL
Village of Hoffman
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
1:18-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Estates
Dolton, Village ofHoffman Estates,
(Federal)
Village of Maywood, Village o
C-83
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Merrionette Park, Village of North
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Village of Addison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Village ofLa
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Grange Park
Village ofLa Grange Park, Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
Dolton, Village Qf Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
IL
Village of Maywood
Merrionette Park, Village of North
1:18-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
(Federal)
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Village ofAddison, Village ofBensenvdle,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Village of McCook
Village ofLa Grange Park Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
Village ofMelrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
Village of Melrose
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
Park
of Hillside, City ofNorthlake, Village of
1:18-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City of Pekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
Dolton, Village of Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
IL
Village of
Merrionette Park Village ofNorth
1:18-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Merrionette Park
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
(Federal)
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
IL
Village of North
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
'
1:18-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Riverside
Village o Chicago Ridge, Village o
Federal
:E
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Dolton, Village of Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
Merrionette Park, Village of North
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Village of Melrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
Village of Oak
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
Lawn
of Hillside, City of Northlake, Village of
1:18-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City of Pekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Village ofAddison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Village of Oak Park
Village ofLa Grange Park, Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
Dolton, Village ofHoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
IL
Village of Orland
Merrionette Park, Village of North
1:1.8-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Park
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
(Federal)
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
Dolton, Village of Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
IL
Village of Posen
Merrionette Park, Village of North
1:18-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
(Federal)
Peoria, Village ofPosen, Village ofRiver
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Village of Melrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
Village of River
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
Forest
of Hillside, City of Northlake, Village of
1:18-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City of Pekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
IL
Village of River
City of Harvey, Village of'Broadview,
1:18-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Grove
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village o
Federal
C-85
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Dolton, Village of Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
Merrionette Park, Village of North
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
Peoria, Village of Posen, Village of River
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Village of Addison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook, Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Village of Riverside
Village ofLa Grange Park, Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
Village of Addison, Village of Bensenville,
Village of Bolingbrook; Village of Forest
Park, Village of Franklin Park, Village of
Village of Schiller
Harwood Heights, City of Kankakee,
N.D. Ohio
IL
Park
Village ofLa Grange Park, Village of
1:21-op-45018
(Federal)
McCook, Village of Oak Park, Village of
Riverside, Village of Schiller Park, City of
Streator v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
City of Harvey, Village of Broadview,
Village of Chicago Ridge, Village of
Dolton, Village of Hoffman Estates,
Village of Maywood, Village of
IL
Village of Stone
Merrionette Park, Village of North
1:l 8-op-46335
N.D. Ohio
Park
Riverside, Village of Orland Park, City of
(Federal)
Peoria, Village ofPosen, Village ofRiver
Grove, Village of Stone Park, and Orland
Fire Protection District v. Purdue
Pharma L.P., et al.
Village ofMelrose Park, Village of
Bellwood, Village of Berkeley, City of
Village of Tinley
Berwyn, City of Chicago Heights, Village
N.D. Ohio
IL
Park
of Hillside, City ofNorthlake, Village of
1:18-op-46312
(Federal)
Oak Lawn, City ofPekin, Village of River
Forest, And Village of Tinley Park v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Socorro Independent School District,
MDL - In re
Downey Unitiied School District, Kern
Texas Opioid
High School District, Waukegan
Litigation
Community Unit School District, Bibb
2020-70878 /
(TX - 152nd
Waukegan
County School District, South Bend
2018-63587
Judicial
IL
Community Unit
Community School Corp., Mesa County
(master) / 1:21-
District of
School District
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
op-45080
Harris
Unified School District, Smith -Green
County)
Community Schools, School City of
(State MDL)
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
/ N.D. Ohio
ofHillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
(Federal)
e
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
KY, and City of Mt. Washington, KY v.
Abb Vie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
Independent School Dist., Irving
Independent School District, Socorro
Independent School District, Downey
Unified School District, Kern High School
District, Waukegan Community Unit
School District, Bibb County School
District, South Bend Community School
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of *Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
City of Alexandria, City ofElwood and
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Alexandria
Madison County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45151
(Federal)
et al.
City of Beech Grove, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Beech Grove
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46103
(Federal)
al.
IN
City of Bloomington
City of Bloomington and Monroe County
1:18-op-45235
N.D. Ohio
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
IN
City of Connersville
City of Connersville and Fayette County
1:18-op-45159
N.D. Ohio
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Alexandria, City ofElwood and
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Elwood
Madison County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45151
(Federal)
et al.
City of Evansville, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Evansville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45591
(Federal)
al.
City of Fishers, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Fishers
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45845
(Federal)
al.
IN
City of Fort Wayne
City of Fort Wayne, Indiana v. Cardinal
1:18-op-45123
N.D. Ohio
Health, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
City of Franklin, Town of Pendleton and
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Franklin
City of Richmond v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46182
(Federal)
et al.
IN
City of Gary
City of Gary, Indiana v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45929
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Greenwood, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Greenwood
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45109
(Federal)
al.
IN
City of Hammond
City of Hammond v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45082
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
Hartford City, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Hartford
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45854
(Federal)
al.
C-87
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
IN
City of Indianapolis
City of Indianapolis and Marion County
1:17-op-45091
N.D. Ohio
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Jasper, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Jasper
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-46027
(Federal)
al.
City
City of Jeffersonville, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
Jeffersonville
Jeffers
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45961
(Federal)
al.
City of Kokomo, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Kokomo
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45127
(Federal)
al.
IN
City of Lafayette
City of Lafayette v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:17-op-45081
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
City of Lawrence, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Lawrence
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45805
(Federal)
al.
IN
City of Logansport
City of Logansport v. Purdue Pharma
18-op-45692
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Martinsville, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Martinsville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
18-op-45346
(Federal)
al.
Socorro Independent School District,
Downey Unified School District, Kern
High School District, Waukegan
Community Unit School District, Bibb
County School District, South Bend
Community School Corp., Mesa County
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
Unified School District, Smith -Green
Community Schools, School City of
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
MDL - In re
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
Texas Opioid
KY, and City ofMt. Washington, KY v.
Litigation
Abb Vie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
2020-70878 /
(TX - 152nd
Independent School Dist., Irving
2018-63587
Judicial
IN
City of Mishawaka
Independent School District, Socorro
(master) / 1:21-
District of
Independent School District, Downey
op-45080
Harris
Unified School District, Kern High School
County)
District, Waukegan Community Unit
(State MDL)
School District, Bibb County School
/ N.D. Ohio
District, South Bend Community School
(Federal)
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
City of Montpelier; Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Montpelier
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45806
(Federal)
al.
RM
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
IN
City of Muncie
City of Muncie, Indiana v. Cardinal
1:18-op-45126
N.D. Ohio
Health, Inc., et al.
Federal
City of New Albany, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of New Albany
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-46333
(Federal)
al.
IN
City of New Castle
City of New Castle v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45016
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Noblesville, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Noblesville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45124
(Federal)
al.
City of Peru, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Peru
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45794
(Federal)
al.
IN
City of Portland
City of Portland and Jay County v.
1:18-op-46140
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Franklin, Town of Pendleton and
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Richmond
City of Richmond v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46182
(Federal)
et al.
City of Seymour, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Seymour
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45673
(Federal)
al.
City of Shelbyville, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Shelbyville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45960
(Federal)
al.
City of South Bend, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of South Bend
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45400
(Federal)
al.
IN
City of Terre Haute
City of Terre Haute, Indiana v. Cardinal
1:18-op-45129
N.D. Ohio
Health, Inc., et al.
Federal
IN
City of West
City of West LaFayette v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45300
N.D. Ohio
LaFa ette
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
City of Westfield, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
City of Westfield
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46056
(Federal)
al.
County of Allen
The Board of Commissioners of the
N.D. Ohio
IN
(Board of
County ofAllen v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45121
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.
IN
County of Benton
Benton County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-46201
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
Blackford County, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
County of Blackford
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46336
(Federal)
al.
IN
County of Delaware
Delaware County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45963
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
IN
County of Fayette
City of Connersville and Fayette County
1:18-op-45159
N.D. Ohio
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
County of Franklin
The Board of Commissioners of the
N.D. Ohio
IN
(Board of
County of Franklin v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45827
(Federal)
Commissioners)
L.P., et al.
IN
County of Harrison
Harrison County, Indiana v. Cardinal
1:18-op-45130
N.D. Ohio
Health, Inc., et al.
Federal
e
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Howard County, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
County of Howard
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45172
(Federal)
al.
Jackson County, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
County of Jackson
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45439
(Federal)
al.
IN
County of Jay
City of Portland and Jay County v.
1: 1 8-op-46140
N.D. Ohio
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
IN
County of Jennings
Jennings County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45131
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
IN
County of Lake
Lake County, v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45156
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
IN
County of LaPorte
LaPorte County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45280
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
IN
County of Lawrence
Lawrence County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46188
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
City of Alexandria, City ofElwood and
N.D. Ohio
IN
County of Madison
Madison County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45151
(Federal)
et al.
IN
County of Marion
City oflndianapolis and Marion County
1:17-op-45091
N.D. Ohio
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
IN
County of Marshall
Marshall County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45157
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
IN
County of Monroe
City of Bloomington and Monroe County
1: 1 8-op-45235
N.D. Ohio
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
IN
County of Morgan
Morgan County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 1 8-op-45828
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
IN
County of Orange
Orange County, Indiana v. Purdue
1:1.9-op-45356
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
IN
County of Porter
Porter County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45074
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
IN
County of Pulaski
Pulaski County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-46110
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
IN
County of Ripley
Ripley County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-46155
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
IN
County of St. Joseph
St. Joseph County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45500
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
Starke County, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
County of Starke
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46358
(Federal)
al.
County of
Tippecanoe County, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
'Tippecanoe
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45796
(Federal)
IN
County of
Vanderburgh County v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45498
N.D. Ohio
Vanderbur h
L.P., et al.
Federal
Vigo County, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
County of Vigo
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45128
(Federal)
al.
Texarkana Independent School Dist.,
Fort Wayne
Irving Independent School District,
N.D. Ohio
IN
Community Schools
Socorro Independent School District,
1:21-op-45080
(Federal)
Downey Unified School District, Kern
High School District, Waukegan
C-90
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Community Unit School District, Bibb
County School District, South Bend
Community School Corp., Mesa County
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
Unified School Dist., Smith -Green
Community Schools, School City of
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
KY, City of Mt. Washington, KY, Penn -
Harris -Madison School Corp., and Fort
Wayne Community Schools v. Abb Vie
Inc., et al.
Texarkana Independent School Dist.,
Irving Independent School District,
Socorro Independent School District,
Downey Unified School District, Kern
High School District, Waukegan
Community Unit School District, Bibb
County School District, South Bend
Penn -Harris-
Community School Corp., Mesa County
N.D. Ohio
IN
Madison School
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
1:21-op-45080
(Federal)
Corporation
Unified School Dist., Smith -Green
Community Schools, School City of
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
KY, City of Mt. Washington, KY, Penn -
Harris -Madison School Corp., and Fort
Wayne Community Schools v. Abb Vie
Inc., et al.
Socorro Independent School District,
Downey Unified School District, Kern
High School District, Waukegan
Community Unit School District, Bibb
County School District, South Bend
Community School Corp., Mesa County
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
Unified School District, Smith -Green
MDL - In re
Community Schools, School City of
Texas Opioid
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
Litigation
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
2020-70878 /
(TX - 152nd
School City of
KY, and City ofMt. Washington, KY v.
2018-63587
Judicial
IN
Mishawaka
Abb Vie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
(master) / 1:21-
District of
Independent School Dist., Irving
op-45080
Harris
Independent School District, Socorro
County)
Independent School District, Downey
(State MDL)
Unified School District, Kern High School
/ N.D. Ohio
District, Waukegan Community Unit
(Federal)
School District, Bibb County School
District, South Bend Community School
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City o Hillview, KY, City
C-91
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
Scott County (Board
Scott County, Indiana, by and through its
N.D. Ohio
IN
of Commissioners)
Board of Commissioners v. Purdue
1: 1 7-op-45094
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
Socorro Independent School District,
Downey Unified School District, Kern
High School District, Waukegan
Community Unit School District, Bibb
County School District, South Bend
Community School Corp., Mesa County
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
Unified School District, Smith -Green
Community Schools, School City of
Mishawaka, City of'Mishawaka, IN, City
MDL - In re
ofHillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
Texas Opioid
KY, and City ofMt. Washington, KY v.
Litigation
AbbVie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
2020-70878 /
(TX - 152nd
Smith -Green
Independent School Dist., Irving
2018-63587
Judicial
IN
Community Schools
Independent School District, Socorro
(master) / 1:21-
District of
Independent School District, Downey
op-45080
Harris
Unified School District, Kern High School
County)
District, Waukegan Community Unit
(State MDL)
School District, Bibb County School
/ N.D. Ohio
District, South Bend Community School
(Federal)
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City ofHillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
Socorro Independent School District,
Downey Unified School District, Kern
High School District, Waukegan
Community Unit School District, Bibb
MDL - In re
County School District, South Bend
Texas of
Community School Corp., Mesa County
on
Litigation
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
(TX - 152nd
South Bend
Unified School District, Smith -Green
2020-70878 /
Judicial
IN
Community School
Community Schools, School City of
2018-63587
District of
Corporation
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
(master) / 1:21-
Harris
ofHillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
op-45080
County)
KY, and City ofMt. Washington, KY v.
(State MDL)
Abb Vie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
N.D. Ohio
Independent School Dist., Irving
(Federal)
Independent School District, Socorro
Independent School District, Downey
Unified School District, Kern High School
District, Waukegan Community Unit
C-92
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
School District, Bibb County School
District, South Bend Community School
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
IN
Town of Atlanta
Town ofAtlanta, Indiana v. Cardinal
1:18-op-45125
N.D. Ohio
Health, Inc., et al.
Federal
Town of
Town of Brownstown, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
Brownstown
al erisoureeBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45666
(Federal)
Town of Chandler, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
Town of Chandler
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45440
(Federal)
al.
IN
Town of Danville
Town of Danville v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45215
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
Town of Huntington, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
Town of Huntington
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-46357
(Federal)
al.
Town of
Town of Mooresville, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
Mooresv
Mooresville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45016
(Federal)
al.
City of Franklin, Town of Pendleton and
N.D. Ohio
IN
Town of Pendleton
City of Richmond v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46182
(Federal)
et al.
Town of Plainfield, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
Town of Plainfield
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45017
(Federal)
al.
The Town of Sheridan v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
Town of Sheridan
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45055
(Federal)
al.
Town of Upland, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
Town of Upland
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46356
(Federal)
al.
Town of Zionsville, Indiana v.
N.D. Ohio
IN
Town of Zionsville
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45846
(Federal)
al.
Unified Government of Wyandotte
KS
City of Kansas
County/Kansas City, Kansas v.
1:19-op-45015
N.D. Ohio
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
City of Overland
City of Overland Park, Kansas v.
N.D. Ohio
KS
Park
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46287
(Federal)
al.
Bourbon County, Kansas v.
N.D. Ohio
KS
County of Bourbon
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45781
(Federal)
al.
C-93
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County of Cherokee
Board of Commissioners of Cherokee
N.D. Ohio
KS
(Board of
County, Kansas v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45452
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Drug Corporation, et al.
County of Cowley
Board of County Commissioners of the
KS
(Board of County
Cowley County, Kansas v.
1: 1 8-op-45898
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County of Crawford
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
KS
(Board of County
the County of Crawford v. Purdue
1: 1 8-op-46108
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Pharma L.P., et al.
County of Ford
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
KS
(Board of County
the County of Ford, State of Kansas v.
1:20-op-45263
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
KS
County of Harvery
County of Harvery v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-45848
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
KS
County of Johnson
Johnson County, Kansas v. Purdue
1:19-op-45443
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
County of
Montgomery County, Kansas v.
N.D. Ohio
KS
Montgomery
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45780
(Federal)
County of Neosho
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
KS
(Board of County
the County of Neosho v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-46125
(Federal)
Commissioners)
L.P., et al.
County of Pratt
Board of Commissioners of Pratt County,
N.D. Ohio
KS
(Board of
Kansas v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1: 1 8-op-45451
(Federal)
Commissioners
Corporation, et al.
KS
County of Reno
County of Reno v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45718
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
County of Sedgwick
Board of County Commissioners of
KS
(Board of County
Sedgwick County, Kansas v.
1:18-op-45025
N.D. Ohio
Commissioners)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County of Shawnee
The Board of County Commissioners of
N.D. Ohio
KS
(Board of County
the County of Shawnee, State of Kansas v.
1:20-op-45226
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Unified Government of Wyandotte
KS
County of
County/Kansas City, Kansas v.
1:1.9-op-45015
N.D. Ohio
Wyandotte
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
Leavenworth
Board of Commissioners of Leavenworth
N.D. Ohio
KS
County (Board of
County, Kansas v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45602
(Federal)
Commissioners)
et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Board of Education
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
N.D. Ohio
KY
of Breathitt County
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
C-94
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Board of Education
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
N.D. Ohio
KY
of Bullitt County
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
C-95
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Board of Education
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
N.D. Ohio
KY
of Estill County
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
(`RSU) 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57 Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
C-96
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
55, Maine Sad6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
Board of Education
County Public Schools, Bangor School
N.D. Ohio
KY
of Fayette County
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pitts reld School District, Tamworth
C-97
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Board of Education
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
KY
of Harrison County
District, Maine Regional School Unit
i :20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Public Schools
("RSU) 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
(Federal)
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Board of Education
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
N.D. Ohio
KY
of Hart County
School District, Mason County Public
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
ME
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
Board of Education
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
N.D. Ohio
KY
of Jefferson County
District 86, Fayette County Public
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
C-99
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
Board of Education
County Public Schools, Estill County
of Johnson County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
N.D. Ohio
KY
Public School
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
District
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
C-100
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Board of Education
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
N.D. Ohio
KY
of LaRue County
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD) H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
C-101
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Board of Education
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
KY
of Lawrence County
District, Maine Regional School Unit
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Public Schools
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
(Federal)
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57 Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education
Board of Education of Thornton Township
N.D. Ohio
KY
of Martin County
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
C-102
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department, Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
Board of Education
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
N.D. Ohio
KY
of Menifee County
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
C-103
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Board of Education
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
N.D. Ohio
KY
of Owsley County
County Public Schools, Estill County
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
RSU" 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
C-104
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
Board of Education
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
N.D. Ohio
KY
of Wolfe County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Public Schools
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU) 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57 Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District (`SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
C-105
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City ofRussell, Kentucky; City ofJenkins,
Kentucky; City of Pineville, Kentucky;
City of Worthington, Kentucky; City of
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of Bellefonte
Vaneeburg; Kentucky; City of Greenup,
1:21-op-45094
(Federal)
Kentucky; City of South Shore, Kentucky;
City of Bellefonte, Kentucky v. Abbott
Laboratories, et al.
KY
City of Benham
City of Benham v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45105
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
KY
City of Buckhorn
City of Buckhorn v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1: 19-op-451 11
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
KY
City of C
City of Campbellsville v. Teva
1:19-op-46057
N.D. Ohio
Campbellsville
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
KY
City of Columbia
City of Columbia v. Teva
1:19-op-46129
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
KY
City of Covington
City of Covington, Kentucky v. Purdue
1:18-op-45967
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
KY
City of Florence
City of Florence v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45084
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
KY
City of Grayson
City of Grayson v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45085
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
City ofRussell, Kentucky; City ofJenkins,
Kentucky; City ofPineville, Kentucky;
City of Worthington, Kentucky; City of
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of Greenup
Vanceburg, Kentucky; City of Greenup,
1:21-op-45094
(Federal)
Kentucky; City of South Shore, Kentucky;
City of Bellefonte, Kentucky v. Abbott
Laboratories, et al.
KY
City of Harlan
City of Harlan v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45106
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
KY
City of Henderson
City of Henderson, Kentucky, on behalf of
1:20-op-45062
N.D. Ohio
Themselves v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
Socorro Independent School District,
MDL - In re
Downey Unified School District, Kern
Texas of
High School District, Waukegan
on
Litigation
Community Unit School District, Bibb
2020-70878 /
(TX - 152nd
KY
City of Hillview
County School District, South Bend
2018-63587
Judicial
Community School Corp., Mesa County
(master) / 1:21-
District of
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
op-45080
Harris
Unified School District, Smith -Green
County)
Community Schools, School City of
MDL)
Mishawaka, Cityof Mishawaka, IN, City(State
C-106
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
ofHillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
/ N.D. Ohio
KY, and City of Mt. Washington, KY v.
(Federal)
AbbVie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
Independent School Dist., Irving
Independent School District, Socorro
Independent School District, Downey
Unified School District, Kern High School
District, Waukegan Community Unit
School District, Bibb County School
District, South Bend Community School
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
KY
City of Hyden
City of Hyden v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45101
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
KY
City of Inez
The City oflnez v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45499
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
The Fiscal Court Of Russell County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of Jamestown
Kentucky and City of Jamestown v. Teva
1:19-op-46096
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
City of Russell, Kentucky; City of Jenkins,
Kentucky; City of Pineville, Kentucky;
City of Worthington, Kentucky; City of
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of Jenkins
Vanceburg, Kentucky; City of Greenup,
1:21-op-45094
(Federal)
Kentucky; City of South Shore, Kentucky;
City of Bellefonte, Kentucky v. Abbott
Laboratories, et al.
KY
City of London
City of London v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45103
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
KY
City of Loyall
City of Loyall v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45107
N.D. Ohio
al.
Federal
KY
City of Lynch
City of Lynch v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:19-op-45102
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
KY
City of Manchester
City of Manchester v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45138
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
KY
City of Morehead
City of Morehead v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45104
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
KY
City of Morganfield
City of Morganfield, Kentucky v. Teva
1:20-op-45167
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
Socorro Independent School District,
MDL - In re
Downey Unified School District, Kern
Texas Opioid
High School District, Waukegan
2020-70878 /
Litigation
KY
City of Mt.
Community Unit School District, Bibb
2018-63587
(TX - 152nd
Washington.
County School District, South Bend
(master) / 1:21-
Judicial
Community School Corp., Mesa County
op-45080
District of
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
Harris
Unified School District, Smith -Green
Count
C-107
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Community Schools, School City of
(State MDL)
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
/ N.D. Ohio
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
(Federal)
KY, and City of Mt. Washington, KY v.
AbbVie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
Independent School Dist., Irving
Independent School District, Socorro
Independent School District, Downey
Unified School District, Kern High School
District, Waukegan Community Unit
School District, Bibb County School
District, South Bend Community School
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Calloway County
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of Murray
Kentucky and City ofMurray v. Teva
1:20-op-45038
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
KY
City of Owensboro
City of Owensboro v. Purdue Pharma
1:21-op-45076
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
The City of Paducah, Kentucky, a Home
KY
City of Paducah
Rule Class City in the Commonwealth of
1:18-op-45592
N.D. Ohio
Kentucky v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
(Federal)
Corporation, et al.
KY
City of Paintsville
The City of Paintsville v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45559
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Russell, Kentucky; City of Jenkins,
Kentucky; City of Pineville, Kentucky;
City of Worthington, Kentucky; City of
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of Pineville
Vanceburg, Kentucky; City of Greenup,
1:21-op-45094
(Federal)
Kentucky; City of South Shore, Kentucky;
City of Bellefonte, Kentucky v. Abbott
Laboratories, et al.
KY
City of Pippa Passes
City of Pippa Passes v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45137
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
(Federal)
The City of Prestonburg v.
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of Prestonburg
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45294
(Federal)
al.
City of Russell, Kentucky; City of Jenkins,
Kentucky; City of Pineville, Kentucky;
City of Worthington, Kentucky; City of
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of Russell
Vanceburg, Kentucky; City of Greenup,
1:21-op-45094
(Federal)
Kentucky; City of South Shore, Kentucky;
City of Bellefonte, Kentucky v. Abbott
Laboratories, et al.
KY
City of Russell
City of Russell Springs v. Teva
1:20-op-45125
N.D. Ohio
Springs
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
C-108
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Socorro Independent School District,
Downey Unified School District, Kern
High School District, Waukegan
Community Unit School District, Bibb
County School District, South Bend
Community School Corp., Mesa County
Valley School District 51, Elk Grove
Unified School District, Smith -Green
Community Schools, School City of
Mishawaka, City of Mishawaka, IN, City
MDL - In re
of Hillview, KY, City of Shepherdsville,
Texas Opioid
KY, and City ofMt. Washington, KY v.
Litigation
Abb Vie Inc., et al. / Texarkana
2020-70878 /
(TX - 152nd
City of
Independent School Dist., Irving
2018-63587
Judicial
KY
Shepherdsville
Independent School District, Socorro
(master) / 1:21-
District of
Independent School District, Downey
op-45080
Harris
Unif
ied School District, Kern High School
County)
District, Waukegan Community Unit
(State MDL)
School District, Bibb County School
/ N.D. Ohio
District, South Bend Community School
(Federal)
Corp., Mesa County Valley School
District 51, Elk Grove Unified School
Dist., Smith -Green Community Schools,
School City of Mishawaka, City of
Mishawaka, IN, City of Hillview, KY, City
of Shepherdsville, KY, City of Mt.
Washington, KY, Penn -Harris -Madison
School Corp., and Fort Wayne
Community Schools v. Abb Vie Inc., et al.
City of Russell, Kentucky; City of Jenkins,
Kentucky; City of Pineville, Kentucky;
City of Worthington, Kentucky; City of
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of South Shore
Vanceburg, Kentucky; City of Greenup,
1:21-op-45094
(Federal)
Kentucky; City of South Shore, Kentucky;
City of Bellefonte, Kentucky v. Abbott
Laboratories, et al.
City ofRussell, Kentucky; City ofJenkins,
Kentucky; City ofPineville, Kentucky;
City of Worthington, Kentucky; City of
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of Vanceburg
Vanceburg, Kentucky; City of Greenup,
1:21-op-45094
(Federal)
Kentucky; City of South Shore, Kentucky;
City of Bellefonte, Kentucky v. Abbott
Laboratories, et al.
KY
City of Warfield
The City of Warfield v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45787
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
The City of West Liberty v.
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of West Liberty
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45329
(Federal)
al.
KY
City of Whitesburg
City of Whitesburg v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45218
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
KY
City of Winchester
City of Winchester v. Purdue Pharma
1:18-op-46348
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
C-109
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
City ofRussell, Kentucky; City ofJenkins,
Kentucky; City of Pineville, Kentucky;
City of Worthington, Kentucky; City of
N.D. Ohio
KY
City of Worthington
Vanceburg, Kentucky; City of Greenup,
1:21-op-45094
(Federal)
Kentucky; City of South Shore, Kentucky;
City of Bellefonte, Kentucky v. Abbott
Laboratories, et al.
County of Adair
The Fiscal Court of Adair County, on
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
behalf ofAdair County, Kentucky v. Teva
1:20-op-45059
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court ofAllen County, on
KY
County of Allen
behalf ofAllen County, v.
1:18-op-45008
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court ofAnderson County, on
KY
County of Anderson
behalf ofAnderson County, v.
1:17-op-45006
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The County of Ballard, Kentucky v.
N.D. Ohio
KY
County of Ballard
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45593
(Federal)
al.
County of Bath
The Fiscal Court of Bath County, on
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
behalf of Bath Count, Kentucky v. Teva
1:20-op-45012
(Federal)
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Bell County, on
KY
County of Bell
behalf of Bell County, v.
1:17-op-45026
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Boone County, on
KY
County of Boone
behalf of Boone County, v.
1:17-op-45020
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Bourbon
The Fiscal Court of Bourbon County,
1:l 8-op-45533
N.D. Ohio
Fiscal Court
Kentuckyv. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
The Fiscal Court of Boyd County, on
KY
County of Boyd
behalf of Boyd County, v.
1:17-op-45084
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Boyle County, on
KY
County of Boyle
behalf of Boyle County, v.
1:17-op-45018
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Bracken County, on
KY
County of Bracken
behalf'ofBracken County v.
1:18-op-45395
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County of Breathitt
The Fiscal Court of Breathitt County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-46082
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
County of
Breckinridge County Fiscal Court, on
KY
Breckinridge (Fiscal
behalf of Breckenridge County v.
1:18-op-46273 /
N.D. Ohio
Court)
AmerisourceBergen, et al. /Hardin
1:20-op-45063
(Federal)
County Fiscal Court, on behalf o Hardin
C-110
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County; Breckinridge County Fiscal
Court, on behalf of Breckinridge County;
Green County Fiscal Court, on behalf of
Green County; Meade County Fiscal
Court, on behalf of Meade County; Ohio
County Fiscal Court, on behalf of Ohio
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Bullitt County, on
KY
County of Bullitt
behalf of Bullitt County, v.
1:18-op-45009
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County of Caldwell
The Fiscal Court of Caldwell County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-46001
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
County Calloway
The Fiscal Court of Calloway County
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
o
Kentucky and City ofMurray v. Teva
1:20-op-45038
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Campbell County, on
KY
County of Campbell
behalf of Campbell County, v.
1:17-op-45022
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Carlisle County, on
KY
County of Carlisle
behalf of Carlisle County, v.
1:17-op-45016
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Carter County, on
KY
County of Carter
behalf of Carter County v.
1:18-op-45392
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County Casey
The Fiscal Court Of Casey County
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
o
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-45887
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Christian County, on
KY
County of Christian
behalf of Christian County, v.
1:1.7-op-45070
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Clark County, on
KY
County of Clark
behalf of Clark County, v.
1:17-op-45172
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Clay County, on
KY
County of Clay
behalf of Clay County, v.
1:17-op-45031
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County of Clinton
The Fiscal Court of Clinton County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-45901
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
County of
The Fiscal Court of Cumberland County,
KY
Cumberland (Fiscal
on behalf of Cumberland County, v.
1:17-op-45012
N.D. Ohio
Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
C-111
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County of Daviess
The Fiscal Court of Daviess County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-46171
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
County of
The Fiscal Court of Edmonson County, on
N.D. Ohio
KY
Edmonson (Fiscal
behalf of Edmonson County v. Teva
1:20-op-45084
(Federal)
Court)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Elliott County, on
KY
County of Elliott
behalf'of Elliott County v.
1:18-op-45393
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Estill County, on
KY
County of Estill
behalf of Estill County v.
1:18-op-46126
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Fleming County, on
KY
County of Fleming
behalf of Fleming County, V.
1:17-op-45019
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Floyd
The County of Floyd v. Purdue Pharma
1: 1 8-op-45369
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
The Fiscal Court of Franklin County, on
KY
County of Franklin
behalf of Franklin County, v.
1:17-op-45007
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County of Fulton
The Fiscal Court of Fulton County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:20-op-45045
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
County of Gallatin
The Fiscal Court Of Gallatin County
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-45891
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Garrard County, on
KY
County of Garrard
behalf of Garrard County, v.
1:17-op-45023
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County of Grant
The Fiscal Court of Grant County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:1.9-op-45961
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
Green County Fiscal Court, on Behalf of
Green County, v. AmerisourceBergen, et
al. /Hardin County Fiscal Court, on
behalf of Hardin County; Breckinridge
County of Green
County Fiscal Court, on behalf of
1:18-op-46272 /
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Breckinridge County; Green County
1:20-op-45063
(Federal)
Fiscal Court, on behalf of Green County;
Meade County Fiscal Court, on behalf of
Meade County; Ohio County Fiscal
Court, on behalf of Ohio County v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Greenup County, on
KY
County of Greenup
behalf of Greenup County, v.
1:17-op-45088
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
C-112
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County of Hancock
The Fiscal Court of Hancock County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-46027
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Harlan County, on
KY
County of Harlan
behalf of Harlan County, v.
1:17-op-45027
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County of Harrison
The Fiscal Court of Harrison County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-46030
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
KY
County of Hart
The Fiscal Court of Hart County,
1:19-op-45994
N.D. Ohio
Fiscal Court
Kentuckyv. McKesson Corporation, et al.
Federal
County of
The Fiscal Court of Henderson County,
KY
Henderson (Fiscal
on behalf of Henderson County, v.
1:17-op-45069
N.D. Ohio
Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Henry County, on
KY
County of Henry
behalf of Henry County, v.
1:17-op-45010
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Hickman
The Fiscal Court of Hickman County,
1:20-op-45254
N.D. Ohio
Fiscal Court
Kentuckyv. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
The Fiscal Court of Hopkins County, on
KY
County of Hopkins
behalf of Hopkins County, v.
1:18-op-45010
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Jessamine County, on
KY
County of Jessamine
behalf of Jessamine County, v.
1:17-op-45090
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Kenton County, on
KY
County of Kenton
behalf of Kenton County v.
1:17-op-45089
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Knott
The County ofKnott v. Purdue Pharma
1:1.8-op-45370
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
The Fiscal Court ofKnox County, on
KY
County of Knox
behalf of Knox County, v.
1:17-op-45028
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of LaRue
The Fiscal Court ofLaRue County,
1:19-op-45950
N.D. Ohio
Fiscal Court
Kentuckyv. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
The Fiscal Court ofLaurel County, on
KY
County of Laurel
behalf of Laurel County, v.
1:17-op-45105
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
Lawrence County, Kentucky v.
N.D. Ohio
KY
County of Lawrence
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-46184
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Lee
The Fiscal Court of Lee County, Kentucky
1:18-op-46100
N.D. Ohio
Fiscal Court
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
KY
County of Leslie
The Fiscal Court of Leslie County, on
1:17-op-45029
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
behalf ofLeslie County, v.
(Federal)
C-113
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
The Fiscal Court of Letcher County, on
KY
County of Letcher
behalf of Letcher County v.
1:18-op-46124
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County of Lewis
The Fiscal Court ofLewis County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-45889
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court ofLincoln County, on
KY
County of Lincoln
behalf of Lincoln County, v.
1:17-op-45024
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County of Logan
The Fiscal Court of Logan County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-45951
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Madison County, on
KY
County of Madison
behalf of Madison County, v.
1:17-op-45011
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Marshall County, on
KY
County of Marshall
behalf of Marshall County, v.
1:17-op-45071
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Martin County, on
KY
County of Martin
behalf of Martin County v.
1:18-op-45388
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Mason
The Fiscal Court of Mason County,
1:19-op-45868
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
Kentuckyv. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al
(Federal)
County
The County of McCracken, Kentucky v.
N.D. Ohio
KY
en
McCracken
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45611
(Federal)
al.
County of McLean
The Fiscal Court of McLean County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:20-op-45200
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
Meade County Fiscal Court, on behalf of
Meade County v. AmerisourceBergen, et
al. /Hardin County Fiscal Court, on
behalf of Hardin County; Breckinridge
County of Meade
County Fiscal Court, on behalf of
1:18-op-46275 /
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Breckinridge County; Green County
1:20-op-45063
(Federal)
Fiscal Court, on behalf of Green County;
Meade County Fiscal Court, on behalf of
Meade County; Ohio County Fiscal
Court, on behalf of Ohio County v.
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
County of Mercer
The Fiscal Court of Mercer County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-45952
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
County of Monroe
The Fiscal Court ofMonroe County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:20-op-45016
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
C-114
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
County of
The Fiscal Court of Montgomery County,
KY
Montgomery (Fiscal
on behalf of Montgomery County v.
1:18-op-46144
N.D. Ohio
Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
County Morgan
The Fiscal Court of Morgan County, on
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
o
behalf of Morgan County v. Purdue
1:19-op-45571
(Federal)
Pharma L.P., et al.
County of
The Fiscal Court of Muhlenberg County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
Muhlenberg (Fiscal
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-46053
(Federal)
Court)
Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court ofNicholas County, on
KY
County of Nicholas
behalf of Nicholas County, v.
1:17-op-45025
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
Hardin County Fiscal Court, on behalf of
Hardin County; Breekinridge County
Fiscal Court, on behalf of Breckinridge
County of Ohio
County; Green County Fiscal Court, on
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
behalf of Green County; Meade County
1:20-op-45063
(Federal)
Fiscal Court, on behalf of Meade County;
Ohio County Fiscal Court, on behalf of
Ohio County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
al.
The Fiscal Court of Oldham County, on
KY
County of Oldham
behalf of Oldham County, v.
1:17-op-45067
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Owen
The Fiscal Court of Owen County,
1:18-op-45534
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
Kentuckyv. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
County
The Fiscal Court of Owsley County on
D. Ohio
N.ederal)
KY
urt) t)
(Fiscal Court)
behalf of Owsley County v.
1:18-op-46235
(Federal)
AmerisourceBergen DrugCompany, et al.
The Fiscal Court of Pendleton County, on
KY
County of Pendleton
behalf of Pendleton County, v.
1:1.7-op-45021
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court ofPerry County, on
KY
County of Perry
behalf of Perry County, v.
1:17-op-45110
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Pike
County of Pike v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
1:18-op-45368
N.D. Ohio
al.
(Federal)
The Fiscal Court of Powell County, on
KY
County of Powell
behalf'ofPowell County v.
1:18-op-46145
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Pulaski County, on
KY
County of Pulaski
behalf gfPulaski County, v.
1:17-op-45109
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Rowan
The Fiscal Court ofRowan County, on
1:18-op-45018
N.D. Ohio
Fiscal Court
behalfo Rowan County, v.
Federal
C-115
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
al.
County of Russell
The Fiscal Court of Russell County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky and City of Jamestown v. Teva
1:19-op-46096
(Federal)
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Scott County, on
KY
County of Scott
behalf of Scott County, v.
1:17-op-45173
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Shelby County, on
KY
County of Shelby
behalf of Shelby County, v.
1:17-op-45009
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
The Fiscal Court of Spencer County, on
behalf of Spencer County, v.
KY
County of Spencer
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:17-op-45014 /
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
al. / The Fiscal Court of Spencer County,
1:19-op-46029
(Federal)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., et al.
County of Taylor
The Fiscal Court of Taylor County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-46007
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
KY
County of Todd
The Fiscal Court of Todd County,
1:19-op-45949
N.D. Ohio
Fiscal Court
Kentuckyv. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
The Fiscal Court of Union County, on
KY
County of Union
behalf of Union County, v.
1:17-op-45015
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Warren
Warren County v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
1:20-op-45075
N.D. Ohio
USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
County of Wayne
Wayne County Fiscal Court v.
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45389
(Federal)
County of Webster
The Fiscal Court of Webster County,
N.D. Ohio
KY
(Fiscal Court)
Kentucky v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
1:19-op-46098
(Federal)
Inc., et al.
The Fiscal Court of Whitley County, on
KY
County of Whitley
behalf of Whitley County, v.
1:17-op-45030
N.D. Ohio
(Fiscal Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
KY
County of Wolfe
The Fiscal Court of Wolfe County,
1:18-op-46099
N.D. Ohio
Fiscal Court
Kentuckyv. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
County of
The Fiscal Court of Woodford County, on
KY
Woodford (Fiscal
behalf of Woodford County, v.
1:17-op-45174
N.D. Ohio
Court)
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
al.
Estill County
Estill County Emergency Medical
N.D. Ohio
KY
Emergency Medical
Services v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:18-op-46237
(Federal)
Services
Corporation, et al.
KY
Kentucky River
District Health
Kentucky River District Health
1:19-op-45050
N.D. Ohio
Department
Department v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
C-116
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Lexington -Fayette
Lexington -Fayette Urban County
N.D. Ohio
KY
Urban County
Government v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:17-op-45092
(Federal)
Government
Cor oration, et al.
Louisville/Jefferson
Louisville/Jefferson County Metro
N.D. Ohio
KY
County Metro
Government v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1: 1 7-op-45013
(Federal)
Government
Cor oration, et al.
Bowling Green -Warren County
Community Hospital Corporation; The
Medical Center at Clinton County, Inc.;
The Medical Center at Franklin, Inc.;
ARH Tug Valley Health Services, Inc.
Taylor County
flk/a Highlands Hospital Corporation;
Hospital District
Baptist Healthcare System, Inc.; Baptist
N.D. Ohio
KY
Health Facilities
Health Madisonville, Inc.; Grayson
1:20-op-45060
(Federal)
Corporation
County Hospital Foundation, Inc.; The
Harrison Memorial Hospital, Inc.;
Pikeville Medical Center; Inc.; Saint
Elizabeth Medical Center; Inc.; St. Claire
Medical Center, Inc.; and Taylor County
Hospital District Health Facilities
Corporation v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
MA
City of Amesbury
City ofAmesbury v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45678
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
City of Beverly
City of Beverly v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45219
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
City of Brockton
City of Brockton v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46089
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
City of Cambridge
City of Cambridge v. Purdue Pharma
19-2854-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
L.P., et al.
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
MA
City of Chelsea
City of Chelsea v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45693
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
City of Chicopee
City of Chicopee v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
19-1621-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
et al.
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
City of Easthampton v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
City of Easthampton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45336
(Federal)
al.
MA
City of Everett
City of Everett v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45596
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
C-117
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
MA
City of Fall River
City of Fall River v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-46285
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
MA
City of Fitchburg
The City of Fitchburg v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45030
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
City of Framingham
City of Framingham v. Purdue Pharma
19-1487-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
L.P., et al.
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
City of Gloucester
City of Gloucester v. Purdue Pharma
19-1351-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
L.P., et al.
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
City of Greenfield
City of Greenfield, aka Town of
N.D. Ohio
MA
a/k/a Town of
Greenfield v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:18-op-45017
(Federal)
Greenfield
Corporation, et al.
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
City of Haverhill
City of Haverhill v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
19-1311-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
et al.
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
MA
City of Holyoke
City of Holyoke v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45694
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
City of Leominster
City of Leominster v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45710
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
City of Lowell
City ofLowell v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45514
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
(Federal)
MA
City of Lynn
City of Lynn v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1:18-op-45789
N.D. Ohio
Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MA
City of Malden
City ofMalden v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45487
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MA
City of Medford
The City of Medford v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45110
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
City ofMelrose, Massachusetts v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
City of Melrose
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45951
(Federal)
al.
MA
City of Methuen
City of Methuen, v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45106
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
C-118
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
City of New
City of New Bedford, Massachusetts v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Bedford
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45569
(Federal)
al.
City
City of Newburyport v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Newbu ryport
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45837
(Federal)
al.
City of North
City of North Adams v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Adams
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45702
(Federal)
City of
City of Northampton v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Northampton
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45337
(Federal)
al.
MA
City of Peabody
City of Peabody v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45860
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
City of Pittsfield
City of Pittsf eld v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45335
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
City of Quincy
The City of Quincy v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45008
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
MA
City of Revere
City of Revere, v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45155
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
City of Salem
City of Salem v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
19-1355-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
al
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL)
MA
City of Somerville
City of Somerville v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45319
N.D. Ohio
et al.
(Federal)
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
City of Springfield
City of Springfield v. Purdue Pharma
19-1733-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
L.P., et al.
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
MA
City of Woburn
City of Woburn, v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45103
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
City of Worcester
City of Worcester v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
19-543-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
et al
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
MA
Town of Acushnet
Town ofAcushnet v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45676
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
C-119
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
MA
Town of Agawam
Town ofAgawam v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45792
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Andover
Town ofAndover v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:19-op-45996
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Aquinnah
Town ofAquinnah v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-46091
N.D. Ohio
Dru Cor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Athol
Town ofAthol v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45058
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Auburn
Town of Auburn v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45688
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
Town ofAyer, Massachusetts v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Town of Ayer
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45570
(Federal)
al.
Town of Barnstable v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Town of Barnstable
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45862
(Federal)
al.
Town of
Town ofBelehertown v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Belchertown
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45905
(Federal)
MA
Town of Billerica
Town of Billerica v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45560
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Braintree
Town of Braintree v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45673
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Brewster
Town of Brewster v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45556
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
Town of
Town of Bridgewater v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Bridgewater
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45754
(Federal)
MA
Town of Brookline
Town of Brookline v. AmerisourceBergen
1:1.9-op-45062
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
Town of Canton
Town of Canton v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
19-1615-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
et al.
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
MA
Town of Carver
Town of Carver v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45691
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Charlton
Town of Charlton v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45689
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
Town of
Town of Chelmsford v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Chelmsford
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45952
(Federal)
al.
Town of Clarksburg v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Town of Clarksburg
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45882
(Federal)
al.
MA
Town of Clinton
Town of Clinton, Massachusetts v. Teva
1:19-op-46072
N.D. Ohio
pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Danvers
Town ofDanvers v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45760
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
C-120
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
MA
Town of Dedham
Town of Dedham v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45039
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Dennis
Town of Dennis v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45124
N.D. Ohio
Dru Cor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Douglas
Town ofDouglas v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45706
N.D. Ohio
Dru Cor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Dudley
Town ofDudley v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45707
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
Town of East
Town of East Bridgewater v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Bridgewater
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45721
(Federal)
MA
Town of Eastham
Town of Eastham v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45864
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Easton
Town of Easton, Massachusetts v. Purdue
1:19-op-45920
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Fairhaven
Town of Fairhaven v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45060
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Falmouth
Town ofFalmouth v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46095
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Freetown
Town of Freetown v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45705
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
Town of
Town of Georgetown v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Georgetown
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45879
(Federal)
MA
Town of Grafton
Town of Grafton v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45753
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Hanson
Town ofHanson v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45704
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
Town of Holliston, Massachusetts v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Town of Holliston
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:1.8-op-45874
(Federal)
al.
MA
Town of Hopedale
Town ofHopedale v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45708
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Hull
Town of Hull, Massachusetts v. Teva
1:19-op-46172
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
(Federal)
MA
Town of Kingston
Town of Kingston v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46090
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MA
Town of Lakeville
Town of Lakeville v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45743
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MA
Town of Leicester
Town of Leicester v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45709
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.
(Federal)
MA
Town of Leverett
Town of Leverett v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45836
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
Town of
Town of Longmeadow v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Longmeadow
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46097
(Federal)
MA
Town of Ludlow
Town of Ludlow v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45906
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
Town ofLunenberg, Massachusetts v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Town of Lunenberg
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46156
(Federal)
al.
MA
Town of Lynnfield
Town ofLynnfield v. Purdue Pharma
19-1330-BLS2
MDL - In re
L.P., et al.
O ioid
C-121
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Litigation
(MA -
Superior
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
Town of
Town of Marblehead v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Marblehead
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45791
(Federal)
al.
Town of Marshfield v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Town of Marshfield
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45752
(Federal)
al.
MA
Town of Mashpee
Town ofMashpee v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45755
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
Town of
Town of Mattapoisett v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Mattapoisett
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45890
(Federal)
Town of
Town of Middleborough v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Middleborough
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-46200
(Federal)
MA
Town of Milford
Town of Milford v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45783
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Millbury
Town of Millbury v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-46123
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Millis
Town of Millis, Massachusetts v. Teva
1:20-op-45275
N.D. Ohio
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Nantucket
Town of Nantucket v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45703
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
Town of Natick
Town of Natick v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et
19-2002-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
al
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
Town of North
Town of North Andover v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Andover
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46159
(Federal)
Town of North
Town of North Attleborough v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Attleborough
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45744
(Federal)
al.
Town of North
Town of North Reading v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Reading
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45856
(Federal)
Town of
Town of Northbridge v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Northbridge
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45711
(Federal)
MA
Town of Norton
Town ofNorton v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45787
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
C-122
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
MA
Town of Norwell
Town of Norwell v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45815
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Norwood
Town of Norwood v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45061
N.D. Ohio
Dru Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Orange
Town of Orange v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45070
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Oxford
Town of Oxford, Massachusetts v. Purdue
1:19-op-45568
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Palmer
Town of Palmer v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45812
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Pembroke
Town of Pembroke v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45823
N.D. Ohio
Dru Cor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Plainville
Town of Plainville v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45808
N.D. Ohio
DrugCor oration, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Plymouth
Town of Plymouth v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45675
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
Town of
Town ofProvincetown v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Provincetown
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45125
(Federal)
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
Town of Randolph
Town of Randolph v. Purdue Pharma
19-2573-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
L.P., et al.
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL
MA
Town of Rehoboth
Town of Rehoboth v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45059
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
(Federal)
MA
Town of Rockland
Town ofRockland v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45824
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MA
Town of Salisbury
Town of Salisbury v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45595
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MA
Town of Sandwich
Town of Sandwich v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45891
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MA
Town of Scituate
Town of Scituate v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45063
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MA
Town of Seekonk
Town of Seekonk v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45881
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Sheffield
Town of Sheffield eld v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46001
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Shirley
Town of Shirley v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45880
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Somerset
Town ofSomerset v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45769
N.D. Ohio
Dru Corporation, et al.
Federal
Town of South
Town of South Hadley v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Hadley
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46000
(Federal)
Town of
Town of Southbridge v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Southbridge
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45686
(Federal)
C-123
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
MA
Town of Spencer
Town of Spencer v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45809
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Stoneham
Town of Stoneham v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46164
N.D. Ohio
Dru Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Stoughton
Town of Stoughton v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45023
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Sturbridge
Town of Sturbridge v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45990
N.D. Ohio
Dru Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Sudbury
Town of Sudbury v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-45877
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Sutton
Town ofSutton v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45810
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
Town of
Town of Swampscott v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Swampscott
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45911
(Federal)
MA
Town of Templeton
Town of Templeton v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45784
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Tewksbury
Town of Tewksbury v. AmerisourceBergen
1:19-op-45077
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Truro
Town of Truro v. AmerisourceBergen
i :18-op-45816
N.D. Ohio
DrugCorporation, et al.
Federal
Town of
Town of Tyngsborough v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Tyngsborough
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45770
(Federal)
MA
Town of Upton
Town of Upton v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46160
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
MDL - In re
Opioid
Litigation
MA
Town of Wakefield
Town of Wakefield v. Purdue Pharma
19-1499-BLS2
(MA -
Superior
L.P., et al.
Court,
County of
Suffolk)
State MDL)
MA
Town of Walpole
Town of Walpole v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-46093
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
(Federal)
MA
Town of Ware
Town of Ware v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45907
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Warren
Town of Warren v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45811
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
Town of Watertown v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Town of Watertown
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45674
(Federal)
al.
Town of Wellfleet, Massachusetts v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Town of Wellfleet
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:19-op-45556
(Federal)
al.
Town of West
Town of West Boylston v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Boylston
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45858
(Federal)
Town of West
Town of West Bridgewater v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Bridgewater
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46102
(Federal)
C-124
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Town of West
Town of West Springfield v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Springfield
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45813
(Federal)
al.
Town of West
Town of West Tisbury v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Tisbury
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45790
(Federal)
Town of
Town of Westborough v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Westborough
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45859
(Federal)
MA
Town of Westford
Town of Westford v. AmerisourceBergen
1: 1 8-op-46007
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MA
Town of Weymouth
Town of Weymouth v. Purdue Pharma
1:19-op-45672
N.D. Ohio
L.P., et al.
Federal
Town of
Town of Williamsburg v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Williamsburg
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45883
(Federal)
Town of
Town of Wilmington v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Wilmington
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-46158
(Federal)
Town of
Town of Winchendon v.
N.D. Ohio
MA
Winchendon
al erisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45687
(Federal)
MA
Town of Winthrop
Town of Winthrop v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45814
N.D. Ohio
Drug Cor oration, et al.
Federal
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Baltimore City
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
N.D. Ohio
MD
Board of School
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
1:20-op-45281
(Federal)
Commissioners
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
(``RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
C-125
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
MD
City of Aberdeen
City of Aberdeen, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45772
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
City of Bel Air
City of Bel Air, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45669
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
City of Berlin
City of Berlin, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45676
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Harford County, Caroline County,
Garrett County, Frederick County, Talbot
County, City of Frederick, The Mayor and
N.D. Ohio
MD
City of Bowie
Common Council of Westminster, City of
1:18-op-45853
(Federal)
Bowie and the Mayor and Council of
Rockville, Maryland v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
MD
City of Cambridge
City of Cambridge, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45611
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
(Federal)
MD
City of Charlestown
City of Charlestown, Maryland v. Purdue
1:1.9-op-45677
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Cumberland, Maryland v.
N.D. Ohio
MD
City of Cumberland
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45624
(Federal)
al.
Harford County, Caroline County,
Garrett County, Frederick County, Talbot
County, City of Frederick, The Mayor and
N.D. Ohio
MD
City of Frederick
Common Council of Westminster City of
1:18-op-45853
(Federal)
Bowie and the Mayor and Council of
Rockville, Maryland v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
MD
City of Frostburg
City of Frostburg v. AmerisourceBergen
1:18-op-45617
N.D. Ohio
Drug Corporation, et al.
Federal
MD
City of Grantsville
City of Grantsville, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45668
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
City of Hagerstown, Maryland v.
N.D. Ohio
MD
City of Hagerstown
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45622
(Federal)
al.
MD
City of Havre De
City of Havre De Grace v. Purdue
1:19-op-45678
N.D. Ohio
Grace
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
City of Laurel
City ofLaurel, Maryland v. Purdue
1: 1 9-op-45714
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
C-126
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
MD
City of Mountain
City of Mountain Lake Park, Maryland v.
1:19-op-45666
N.D. Ohio
Lake Park
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
City of North East
City of North East, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45670
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
City of Oakland
City of Oakland, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45916
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
City of Perryville
City of Perryville, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45679
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
City of Seat
The City of'Seat Pleasant, Maryland v.
1:19-op-45288
N.D. Ohio
Pleasant
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
City of Vienna
City of Vienna, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45680
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Allegany County, Maryland v.
N.D. Ohio
MD
County of Allegany
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1: 1 8-op-45652
(Federal)
al.
MD - Circuit
MD
County of Anne
Anne Arundel County, Maryland v.
C-02-CV-18-
Court for
Anne
Arundel
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
000021
Arundel
State
MD
County of Baltimore
Baltimore County v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,
1:18-op-45554
N.D. Ohio
et al.
Federal
County of Calvert
County Commissioners of Calvert v.
N.D. Ohio
MD
(County
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45609
(Federal)
Commissioners
Harford County, Caroline County,
Garrett County, Frederick County, Talbot
County, City of Frederick, The Mayor and
N.D. Ohio
MD
County of Caroline
Common Council of Westminster, City of
1:1.8-op-45853
(Federal)
Bowie and the Mayor and Council of
Rockville, Maryland v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
County of Carroll
The County Commissioner of Carroll
N.D. Ohio
MD
(County
County v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:20-op-45052
(Federal)
Commissioners
Cecil County, Maryland, v.
N.D. Ohio
MD
County of Cecil
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
1:18-op-45100
(Federal)
al.
County of Charles
County Commissioners of Charles County
N.D. Ohio
MD
(County
v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
1:19-op-45094
(Federal)
Commissioners
MD
County of
Dorchester County, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45610
N.D. Ohio
Dorchester
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Harford County, Caroline County,
Garrett County, Frederick County, Talbot
County, City of Frederick, The Mayor and
N.D. Ohio
MD
County of Frederick
Common Council of Westminster City of
1:18-op-45853
(Federal)
Bowie and the Mayor and Council of
Rockville, Maryland v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Harford County, Caroline County,
N.D. Ohio
MD
County of Garrett
Garrett County, Frederick County, Talbot
1:18-op-45853
(Federal)
County, City of Frederick, The Mayor and
C-127
State
Subdivision/Special
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District
Common Council of Westminster, City of
Bowie and the Mayor and Council of
Rockville, Maryland v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Harford County, Caroline County,
Garrett County, Frederick County, Talbot
County, City of Frederick, The Mayor and
N.D. Ohio
MD
County of Harford
Common Council of'Westminster, City of
1: 1 8-op-45853
(Federal)
Bowie and the Mayor and Council of
Rockville, Maryland v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
MD
County of Howard
Howard County, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-46169
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
County of
Montgomery County, Maryland v. Purdue
1:18-op-45212
N.D. Ohio
Montgomery
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
County of Prince
Prince George's County Maryland v.
1:18-op-45501
N.D. Ohio
Geor e's
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
MD
County of Somerset
County of Somerset, Maryland v. Purdue
1:19-op-45911
N.D. Ohio
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
County of St.
Commissioners of St. Mary's County,
N.D. Ohio
MD
Mary's (County
Maryland v. AmerisourceBergen Drug
1: 1 8-op-46334
(Federal)
Commissioners)
Corporation, et al.
Harford County, Caroline County,
Garrett County, Frederick County, Talbot
County, City of Frederick, The Mayor and
N.D. Ohio
MD
County of Talbot
Common Council of Westminster; City of
1: 1 8-op-45853
(Federal)
Bowie and the Mayor and Council of
Rockville, Maryland v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
County of
Board of County Commissioners of
MD
Washington (Board
Washington County, Maryland v.
1: 1 8-op-46060
N.D. Ohio
of County
AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation, et
(Federal)
Commissioners)
al.
MD
County of
County of Wicomico, Maryland v. Purdue
1:1 9-op-45681
N.D. Ohio
Wicomico
Pharma L.P., et al.
Federal
Mayor and City
MD - Circuit
MD
Council of
Mayor & City Council of Baltimore v.
24C18000515
Court for
Baltimore
Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Baltimore
City State
Harford County, Caroline County,
Garrett County, Frederick County, Talbot
Mayor and Common
County, City of Frederick The Mayor and
N.D. Ohio
MD
Council of
Common Council of Westminster City of
1:18-op-45853
(Federal)
Westminster
Bowie and the Mayor and Council of
Rockville, Maryland v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
Harford County, Caroline County,
Garrett County, Frederick County, Talbot
Mayor and Council
County, City of Frederick The Mayor and
N.D. Ohio
MD
of Rockville
Common Council of Westminster City of
1:18-op-45853
(Federal)
Bowie and the Mayor and Council of
Rockville, Maryland v. Purdue Pharma
L.P., et al.
C-128
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Town of Cottage
Towns of Cottage City, Forest Heights,
N.D. Ohio
MD
City
North Brentwood and Upper Marlboro v.
1:20-op-45235
(Federal)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Town of Forest
Towns of Cottage City, Forest Heights,
N.D. Ohio
MD
Heights
North Brentwood and Upper Marlboro v.
1:20-op-45235
(Federal)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Town of North
Towns of Cottage City, Forest Heights,
N.D. Ohio
MD
Brentwood
North Brentwood and Upper Marlboro v.
1:20-op-45235
(Federal)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Town of Upper
Towns of Cottage City, Forest Heights,
N.D. Ohio
MD
Marlboro
North Brentwood and Upper Marlboro V.
1:20-op-45235
(Federal)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
Board of Education
County Public Schools, Bangor School
ME
Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Department
D
District, Maine Regional School Unit
(Federal)
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behal(of themselves
C-129
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Board of Education
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
ME
of Cape Elizabeth
District, Maine Regional School Unit
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Department
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
(Federal)
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Board of Education
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
ME
of Ellsworth School
School District, Mason County Public
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Department
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
(Federal)
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
C-130
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD) H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
Board of Education
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
ME
of Maine Regional
District 86, Fayette County Public
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Unit 10
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
(Federal)
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Meni ee County Public Schools,
C-131
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Board of Education
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
ME
of Maine Regional
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Unit l 3
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
(Federal)
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU) 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District `SAD' 11,
C-132
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Board of Education
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
ME
of Maine Regional
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Unit 25
County Public Schools, Bangor School
(Federal)
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD) H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
C-133
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Board of Education
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
ME
of Maine Regional
District, Maine Regional School Unit
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Unit 26
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
(Federal)
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education
Board of Education of Thornton Township
ME
of Maine Regional
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Unit 29
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
(Federal)
School District, Mason County Public
C-134
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD) H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department, Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
Board of Education
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
ME
of Maine Regional
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Unit 34
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
(Federal)
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
C-135
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD) H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Board of Education
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
ME
of Maine Regional
County Public Schools, Estill County
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Unit 40
public Schools, Harrison County Public
(Federal)
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
(`RSU) 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
C-136
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department, Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
Board of Education
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
ME
of Maine Regional
Public Schools, Martin County Public
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Unit 50
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
(Federal)
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57 Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District (`SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
C-137
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Board of Education
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
ME
of Maine Regional
District, Maine Regional School Unit
i :20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Unit 57
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
(Federal)
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') H,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
C-138
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
School District, Mason County Public
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larne County Public Schools,
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Board of Education
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
ME
of Maine Regional
District, Maine Regional School Unit
i :20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
School Unit 60
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
(Federal)
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.
Board of Education of Thornton Township
High Schools, District 205, 1 Rochester
Public School District, Minnetonka Public
Board of Education
School District, Mason County Public
ME
Maine Regional
Schools, Baltimore City Public Schools,
1:20-op-45281
N.D. Ohio
Sc
School Unit 71
East Aurora Public Schools, District 131,
(Federal)
Thornton Fractional High Schools,
District 215, Joliet Public Schools,
District 86, Fayette County Public
Schools, Larue County Public Schools,
C-139
State
Subdivision/Special
District
Case Caption
Case No.
Jurisdiction
Bullitt County Public Schools, Breathitt
County Public Schools, Estill County
Public Schools, Harrison County Public
Schools, Hart County Public Schools,
Jefferson County Public Schools, Johnson
County Public Schools, Lawrence County
Public Schools, Martin County Public
Schools, Menifee County Public Schools,
Owsley County Public Schools, Wolfe
County Public Schools, Bangor School
Department, Cape Elizabeth School
District, Maine Regional School Unit
("RSU') 10, Maine RSU 13, Maine RSU
25, Maine RSU 26, Maine RSU 29, Maine
RSU 34, Maine RSU 40, Maine RSU 50,
Maine RSU 57, Maine RSU 60, Maine
RSU 71, Maine RSU 9, Maine School
Administrative District ("SAD') 11,
Maine Sad 15, Maine Sad 28/Five Town
Central School District, Maine Sad 35,
Maine Sad 44, Maine Sad 53, Maine Sad
55, Maine Sad 6, Maine Sad 61, Maine
Sad 72, Portland School District,
Scarborough School District, South
Portland School District, St. George
Municipal School District, Waterville
School District, Ellsworth School
Department; Goshen School District,
Kearsarge RSU School Administrative
Unit 65, Lebanon School District,
Pittsfield School District, Tamworth
School District, on behalf of themselves
and others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.