Law Center Search Results

The NAM filed an amicus brief in the Oklahoma Supreme Court arguing that the lower court's significant departure from long-standing public nuisance liability principles threatens open-ended, industry-wide liability for a variety of products that may also have foreseeable risks or inherent externalities, including pharmaceuticals, oil and gas, and household chemicals. In this litigation, state and local governments are pursuing manufacturers involved in the selling of prescription opioid medication seeking to subject them to joint and several industry-wide liability for all costs related to opioid abuse. The Attorney General here is invoking Oklahoma’s public nuisance statute and arguing that, if misleading, marketing and promotion of this legal, highly regulated product could somehow constitute a public nuisance under the statute. As the NAM's brief shows, neither Oklahoma’s public nuisance statute nor common law public nuisance theory, here or elsewhere, imposes such unprincipled, open-ended liability. The NAM's amicus brief further emphasizes that absent wrongful causation, liability law does not impose blame or obligations on manufacturers engaged in the commerce of beneficial, regulated products. This case is important for all manufacturers, because If the lower court’s ruling is allowed to stand, manufacturers could be subject to industry-wide liability in Oklahoma for selling and marketing products with known risks of harm with few if any defenses.

Happily, on November 9, 2021, the court overturned the verdict, finding that the award rested on an improper expansion of state law.