Judge Rules Boston Waited Too Long to Sue Drug Intermediaries Over Opioid Crisis

A federal judge has dismissed the city of Boston’s lawsuit seeking to hold pharmacy benefit managers liable for the opioid epidemic. US District Judge Patti B. Saris ruled that the suit against the drug intermediaries was filed too late.

The city pursued two claims for legal relief, both of which the court said were untimely. First, the city argued that the pharmacy benefit managers Express Scripts and Optum violated the state’s public nuisance law; second the city claimed that they violated the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

Federal RICO claims are subject to a four-year statute of limitations, accruing from the date when a plaintiff knew or should have known of his injury.

In Massachusetts, public nuisance claims must be brought within three years next after the cause of action accrues.

The court agreed with the defendants that the city knew or should have known about the harms caused by opioids at least by 2018 when the city sued drug manufacturers, but it did not file its lawsuit against the PBMs until six years later in 2024—which was beyond both statutes of limitations.

In Boston, the opioid prescription rate between 2010 and 2016 was double the state average and three times the national average. Consequently, Boston accounted for the largest share of opioid-related fatalities in the state. In 2021, the city recorded 251 opioid overdose deaths, and in 2022, there were 2,670 opioid-related incidents.

In response, the city implemented costly interventions, including a recovery services center and the installation of opioid reversal kits in public buildings. Despite these efforts, the crisis overwhelmed emergency responders and disrupted daily life, according to the city.

The city alleged that its harms were connected to the actions of the PBMs. The suit claimed that Express Scripts and Optum collaborated with opioid manufacturers to misrepresent the risks of opioids and used preferred formulary placement to ensure the drugs would be covered by prescription health insurance, increasing demand and proliferation of opioids in the city. The city claims that, through these actions, they created a public nuisance under Massachusetts law and violated the federal RICO statute.

The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim on the ground that the claims were time-barred.

The judge also found that the city lacked standing to pursue equitable relief under RICO. To obtain injunctive relief, a plaintiff must demonstrate “a threat of injury that is both ‘”real and immediate,” not “conjectural” or “hypothetical.” The judge said the city “failed to allege any ongoing acts by the PBMs that would establish an immediate or real threat of future harm.” Accordingly, the court dismissed the claim for equitable relief under RICO.

Topics Lawsuits Legislation