%1

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday turned away a novel case by Arizona seeking to recover billions of dollars that the state has said that members of the Sackler family — owners of Purdue Pharma LP — funneled out of the OxyContin maker before the company filed for bankruptcy in September, Reuters reported. The justices declined to take the rare step of allowing Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich to pursue a case directly with the Supreme Court on the role the drugmaker played in the U.S. opioid epidemic that has killed tens of thousands of Americans annually in recent years. The lawsuit accused eight Sackler family members of funneling $4 billion out of Purdue from 2008 to 2016 despite being aware that the company faced massive potential liabilities over its marketing of opioid medications. Brnovich argued that the national importance of holding those responsible for the opioid crisis accountable justified taking the case directly to the justices. The case is among the thousands filed by states, counties and cities seeking to hold Stamford, Connecticut-based Purdue, and in many cases the Sacklers, responsible for a U.S. opioid addiction crisis that since 1999 has resulted in more than 400,000 overdose deaths. The lawsuits accuse the company of deceptively marketing opioids by overstating their benefits and playing down the risks. Purdue filed for chapter 11 protection in September after reaching a tentative deal it values at $10 billion to resolve those cases.

The U.S. Supreme Court asked for the Trump administration’s views on a $3 billion appeal from foreign financial institutions that took stolen money from Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi scheme, WSJ Pro Bankruptcy reported. The justices yesterday asked the U.S. solicitor general to weigh in on whether the trustee cleaning up after Madoff’s Ponzi scheme can pursue tainted cash that was sent to offshore investment funds, then passed on to European banks and other foreign recipients. Irving Picard, the trustee cleaning up after the Ponzi scheme, has long maintained that under U.S. bankruptcy law, he can recoup stolen money that passed between foreign institutions before the $20 billion fraud was discovered. Banks including HSBC Holdings PLC and several Caribbean governments have fought Picard’s efforts, saying that transfers occurring entirely outside U.S. borders are beyond his grasp. Picard has recouped more than $13 billion in Ponzi scheme proceeds over the past decade, arguing that money withdrawn from Madoff’s phantom investment firm should help repay average investors who came out as net losers when the fraud collapsed in 2009. Madoff pleaded guilty to running the largest Ponzi scheme in history and is serving a 150-year prison sentence in North Carolina. Read more. 

For a further analysis of commercial fraud, make sure to pick up a copy of ABI’s Fraud and Forensics: Piercing Through the Deception in a Commercial Fraud Case.