Cleveland County District Judge Thad Balkman will give both parties an hour Monday morning to argue their case before deciding whether to throw itout or to allow it to proceed."One would expect vigorous arguments, somewhat akin to a late July 4th fireworks display," court spokesman Bob Burke said. Johnson & Johnson on Wednesday filed its motion for a directed judgment, which is a move seeking dismissal on the grounds the state failed to produce enough evidence to support its case. The drugmaker has consistently denied any wrongdoing, saying it followed the law and acted appropriately in its marketing and promotion of opioids.Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter accused Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries of creating a public nuisance with its alleged role in the opioid crisis, costing the state billions of dollars and destroying thousands of lives. The state has presented a $17.5 billion abatement plan over 30 years to fix the opioid epidemic. John Sparks, Oklahoma counsel for Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary Janssen, rejected all such allegations, saying the state is trying to hold Johnson & Johnson and Janssen liable for damages "without offering any evidence that the companies were the cause of Oklahoma's opioid crisis." If Balkman sideswith Johnson & Johnson, the case would be over.Oklahoma attorney slams Johnson & Johnson witness in opioid trial"Now that the State has formally rested its case, we have filed a motion that respectfully requests the Court find in favor of defendants because, as detailed fully in the motion, the State does not have sufficient evidence to prove its claims," Sparkssaid."By seeking to impose liability on a single defendant for a complex social crisis that has taken a tragic toll on this country, the State has put this court in an untenable position," Johnson & Johnson said in its filing. "The State has used this trial — and a slew of illogical, legally defective theories far outside the bounds of Oklahoma precedent — not to 'abate' anything but to find a scapegoat."The company said the state of Oklahoma was only after one thing: "Janssen's pocketbook — not its products."

Attorney general: Johnson & Johnson must 'clean up the mess they made'

It is not uncommon in a civil bench trial for a defendant to file such a motion to end the trial. The trial, now in its seventh week, will proceed if the judge rejects the motion. Last week, the judge said Johnson & Johnson informed him it could rest its case as early as this Friday, depending on how long witnesses take on the stand.In a statement to CNN, the Oklahoma attorney general remained steadfast, saying the facts were clear and that Johnson & Johnson remains in denial about its role in the opioid epidemic. Opioid Crisis Fast Facts"Despite the state's evidence and even as the company's witnesses continue to corroborate our case, Johnson & Johnson still refuses to take responsibility for the opioid epidemic they created," Hunter said. He pointed to the fact thatJohnson & Johnson once owned two subsidiaries in Tasmania that allowed it to supply more than 60% of all active ingredients for opioids manufactured and sold in the United States, including the blockbuster painkiller OxyContin made by Purdue Pharma."Despite the damning evidence against the company, it continues to blame Oklahomans in its shameful attempt to wash its hands of the problem," Hunter said. "To this point, we have heard zero reasons as to why they are not liable and why they shouldn't have to clean up the mess they made."In its legal filing, Johnson & Johnson acknowledges the two former subsidiaries, Tasmanian Alkaloids and Noramco, produced the raw materials for opioid prescription painkillers made by other companies, but argues it should not be held responsible on legal grounds."The theory fails because Tasmanian Alkaloids and Noramco sold their products under strict international and federal regulatory systems," Johnson & Johnson said. Expert witness breaks down in tears during Oklahoma opioid trialThe company went on to say the Drug Enforcement Administration authorized the sales as "part of a comprehensive statutory and regulatory scheme designed to ensure reliable supplies of medically necessary drugs.""Federal law preempts the State's frontal assault on that system," Johnson & Johnson said.Brad Beckworth, one of the state's lead attorneys, said he was looking forward to excoriating Johnson & Johnson's motion in court: "You've got the largest supplier in the history of the world of these products, who was a major supplier of drugs in the state of Oklahoma, who had 150,000 targeted calls to our doctors and they are sitting there saying they bear zero responsibility — none.""That is gross and offensive," Beckworth said in a phone interview. "There's a thing about liars: When you confront them with the truth, you canRead More – Source

[contf] [contfnew]

CNN

[contfnewc] [contfnewc]