Text size

In a courtroom in Oklahoma on Monday afternoon, a state court judge is expected to issue a decision that could set the tone for the web of litigation seeking to hold companies responsible for the opioid crisis.

The case, which pits the state of Oklahoma against health care giant Johnson & Johnson (ticker: JNJ), is an odd duck amid the thousands of opioid lawsuits moving their way through court systems nationwide. But because it was the first major trial in the current wave of opioid litigation, investors and the media are paying extremely close attention.

After markets close on Monday, Cleveland County District Judge Thad Balkman will read his decision in open court in the town of Norman, Oklahoma. The trial, which played out over seven weeks in June and July, saw the Oklahoma attorney general, Mike Hunter, blame Johnson & Johnson for “the worst man-made public health crisis in the history of our state and country.”

Johnson & Johnson argued that its prescription opioids made up less than one percent of the opioids sold in Oklahoma during the relevant period. The state, however, highlighted the role of two former Johnson & Johnson subsidiaries in providing ingredients to other makers of prescription opioids.

Patrick Trucchio, a Berenberg Capital Markets analyst who has written extensively on the opioid litigation, wrote that “no one we speak to is expecting a positive outcome for J&J.”

One question that remains is how big a judgement against Johnson and Johnson investors would be comfortable with. Oklahoma has asked for more than $17 billion. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (TEVA) settled with the state for $85 million earlier this year, while the private drugmaker Purdue Pharma settled for $270 million.

Trucchio wrote that, if Oklahoma wins big, it could shift investors’ focus to companies one step removed from the actual production of opioids, given the state’s argument around its role in providing ingredients to other drug makers.

“We have expected the opioid litigation focus, and risk, to be highest for the branded manufacturers, followed by the generic manufacturers and distributors, with minimal exposure for the pharmacies,” he wrote. If the decision is very negative—an amount above Purdue’s $270 million settlement—investors may scrutinize supply, distribution, and collaboration agreements between any health-care company and Purdue, he wrote.

While the Oklahoma trial is a sideshow compared to the larger, more unwieldy and unpredictable federal proceedings, which have been consolidated in a multi-district litigation, some investors will look to the Oklahoma decision to help predict what could happen in the larger federal proceeding. That’s a challenging exercise, due to the extraordinary complexity of the multi-district litigation.

Shares of Johnson & Johnson opened at $127.42 on Monday, and were flat in early trading. The stock is down 1% so far this year.

Write to Josh Nathan-Kazis at josh.nathan-kazis@barrons.com