In re Pharmaceutical Industry Average Wholesale Price Litigation

588 F.3d 24 (2009)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Pharmaceutical Industry Average Wholesale Price Litigation

United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
588 F.3d 24 (2009)

JL

Facts

A class of patients (plaintiffs) who purchased Zoladex through Medicare Part B and paid for a portion of the cost themselves brought a lawsuit against AstraZeneca (AZ) (defendant) for fraudulently inflating the average wholesale price (AWP) of the drug. The AWPs were used to determine how much to reimburse providers when patients obtained the drugs. AZ inflated the AWPs to permit doctors to keep the difference between the higher reimbursement rate and the amount the doctors actually paid to purchase the drug. This was done to induce doctors to purchase this specific drug. Patients either had to pay 20% of the AWP as a co-payment or 4% if they had supplemental insurance that covered a portion of the co-payment. An expert calculated the damages to the class of patients as over $31 million. AZ and the class of patients agreed to settle the lawsuit for $24 million. The parties anticipated that a large portion of the settlement would go unclaimed because many of the patients were elderly or had died and some of the patients could not be found. To address this, the parties agreed that each plaintiff could collect double the actual amount of damages suffered. The parties also agreed that any funds not claimed, up to $10 million, would be placed into a cy pres fund that would pay the funds to a mutually acceptable charitable organization. One class representative, Joyce Howe, objected to the settlement and argued that more of the settlement amount should go to the patients that made claims. The trial court agreed and adjusted the settlement to pay treble damages to the plaintiffs with the strongest claims. Howe appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Lynch, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 745,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 745,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 745,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership