Constitutional Law,
Civil Litigation
May 26, 2021
Opioid trials remind us of importance of Brady rights
The reason for the startling default judgment against the Endo defendants in a recent case was founded in a fraud on the court, based on misrepresentations made by the defendants in the discovery process to suppress or conceal discoverable evidence.
Last year, I wrote a piece about the conflicting nature of opioid litigation in America. That article explored the history of opioid manufacturers' representations to the public regarding the addictive qualities of the drugs and the attendant litigation. What was most interesting was that each stakeholder blamed the other for the countless deaths attributable to opioid addiction: pharmacies blamed doctors, doctors blamed manufacturers, manufacturers blamed pharmacies,...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In