Professional Documents
Culture Documents
400000/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6799 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/02/2020
Defendants Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Endo Health Solutions Inc. (together,
“Endo”) and Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. and Par Pharmaceutical Companies, Inc. (together “Par”)
submit this Notice of Joinder in the Distributors’ Motion for Apportionment of Causation and
Responsibility at Trial (NYSCEF Doc. No. 6762-6792) and in the joinders by Allergan Finance,
LLC (NYSCEF Doc. No 6792), the Janssen Defendants (NYSCEF Doc. No 6794), the Teva
Defendants (NYSCEF Doc. No. 6795), and the Actavis Generic Defendants (NYSCEF Doc. No.
6796). As those filings explain in further detail, Plaintiffs’ alleged injury is comprised of a
variety of “distinct harms” for which the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 433A and other
applicable authorities require damages “to be apportioned.” Id. § 433A. That outcome is
responsibility for harm among different causes “do[] not mean that one defendant must be liable
for the distinct harm inflicted by . . . other” causes. Id. cmt. note b. Rather, the finder of fact
1 of 3
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 07/02/2020 11:07 AM INDEX NO. 400000/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6799 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/02/2020
must “fairly apportion” responsibility for “subsidiary elements” of the alleged harm. Id.; see
also Cayuga Indian Nation of New York v. Pataki, 79 F. Supp. 2d 66, 71-73 (N.D.N.Y. 1999)
(applying principle to reject joint and several liability and recognizing that while “division or
allocation among the defendants of the damages sustained by the Cayugas will not be an easy
These authorities apply equally to Endo and Par on the facts of this case. Endo and Par
products, who in turn distributed and sold the medications to licensed pharmacies and health care
providers in New York and elsewhere. The only way that any individual could lawfully obtain
Endo’s or Par’s prescription opioid medications was by obtaining a prescription from a state-
licensed health care provider who was required by law to exercise his or her independent medical
judgment and to only issue prescriptions for medications that he or she deemed medically
necessary based on the particular circumstances. Moreover, Plaintiffs have not identified a
single suspicious order received by Endo or Par (much less one that was shipped into New York)
that Plaintiffs contend should not have been shipped, let alone shown that any such shipment
caused any alleged harm. Nor do Plaintiffs allege that any marketing by Par caused any alleged
harm.
The legal principles articulated in the Distributors’ memorandum, and in the joinders by
Allergan, Janssen, Teva and Actavis, foreclose imposing joint and several liability on Endo and
Par for a wide range of discrete harms that their alleged conduct did not cause and could not have
caused.
2 of 3
FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 07/02/2020 11:07 AM INDEX NO. 400000/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6799 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/02/2020
3 of 3