Nos. 22-3750, 22-3751, 22-3753, 22-3841, 22-3843, 22-3844 File Name: 25a0058n.06

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

IN RE: NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION OPIATE ) LITIGATION. ) ) FILED Jan 31, 2025 ) KELLY L. STEPHENS, Clerk TRUMBULL COUNTY, OH; LAKE COUNTY, ) OH; and PLAINTIFFS’ EXECUTIVE ) COMMITTEE, ) ) Plaintiffs-Appellees, ) ORDER ) v. ) ON APPEAL FROM THE ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT WALGREENS BOOTS ALLIANCE, INC., ) COURT FOR THE NORTHERN WALGREEN COMPANY, WALGREEN ) DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN CO., INC.; CVS PHARMACY, INC., ) OHIO CVS STORES, LLC, CVS TENNESSEE ) DISTRIBUTION, LLC, CVS RX SERVICES, INC., ) CVS INDIANA, LLC; and WALMART, INC., ) ) Defendants-Appellants. ) )

BEFORE: BATCHELDER, GRIFFIN, and BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judges.

We certified to the Ohio Supreme Court a controlling question of law in this matter:

“Whether the Ohio Product Liability Act, Ohio Revised Code § 2307.71 et seq., as amended in

2005 and 2007, abrogates a common law claim of absolute public nuisance resulting from the sale

of a product in commerce in which the plaintiffs seek equitable abatement, including both

monetary and injunctive remedies?” In re Nat’l Prescription Opiate Litig., 82 F.4th 455, 462–63

(6th Cir. 2023). The Ohio Supreme Court accepted our question, 222 N.E.3d 661 (Ohio 2023),

and has now answered it “in the affirmative,” Slip Op. No. 2024-Ohio-5744, at ¶ 36. More

specifically, the Ohio Supreme Court answered that “all common-law public-nuisance claims No. 22-3750, et al., In re: Nat’l Prescription Opiate Litig.

arising from the sale of a product have been abrogated by the Ohio Product Liability Act,” and that

“the Counties’ claims based on dispensing a product are abrogated.” Id. at ¶¶ 1, 35.

The district court previously concluded to the contrary, and ultimately entered a $650

million abatement order and an injunction requiring defendants to “undertake certain actions to

ensure they are complying fully with the Controlled Substances Act and avoiding further improper

dispensing conduct.” The parties do not dispute that the Ohio Supreme Court’s decision on the

certified question resolves this appeal and that it requires us to reverse the district court’s judgment

as to plaintiffs’ common-law absolute public nuisance claims. We therefore vacate the district

court’s judgment, dissolve the injunction, and remand for further proceedings consistent with the

Ohio Supreme Court’s answer to our certified question.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

Kelly L. Stephens, Clerk

-2-