Sean O. Morris

Morris is the managing partner of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP’s Los Angeles office and co-lead counsel for the defense of the landmark multi-district opioid litigation in which thousands of government plaintiffs seek many billions of dollars in damages and abatement for the harms caused by the addiction crisis.

“This case is taking the bulk of my time,” said Morris, who represents one of the defendants, Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. “The MDL is not the only place the case is going forward. There are state cases too, and they take a lot of coordination and discovery and motion practice.”

The plaintiffs allege the manufacturers falsely advertised and improperly encouraged the use of opioid medication for chronic pain. Endo has been named in more than 2,500 suits.

Morris remembers when, as a newly-fledged “baby lawyer,” he worked at a firm representing one of the tobacco industry trade organizations “back at the time when state AGs were bringing claims against the tobacco industry.” Many have analogized the current opioid case to the tobacco and asbestos litigation of the 1990s. “The plaintiffs now talk about those cases,” Morris said. The 1998 tobacco master settlement agreement totaled $206 billion; one research firm concluded recently that the opioid cases might settle for $30 to $55 billion if the same payout-to-damages ratio were applied.

Declining to discuss any possible outcome, Morris said the defendants are ready for court. “Everyone is proceeding as if there will be a trial,” he said, referring to the scheduled Oct. 21, 2019 showdown at a bellwether proceeding in Ohio. In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation, 1:17-md-2804 (N.D. Ohio, filed Dec. 8, 2017).

Meanwhile, Morris is lead counsel in a series of environmental and products liability suits by residents of East Chicago, Indiana, over possible lead contamination. In a case sometimes described as “the next Flint,” the plaintiffs contend that a housing development was built on the sit of a former lead manufacturing facility owned by an alleged predecessor to Morris’ client, Atlantic Richfield Co.

Early in the case Morris and his team won a significant motion to dismiss all tort claims against his client on the grounds that a former owner of a contaminated property does not owe a duty to subsequent users. Federal law claims remain.

“It was government entities that developed the property,” Morris said. “My client or its alleged predecessor did not sell to a housing developer, and operating a lead refinery was hardly a hidden activity.” Rolan v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 1:16-cv-00357 (N.D. Ind., filed Oct. 6, 2017). Morris enjoys the challenges. “These are cutting edge mass torts with legal issues not always well defined,” he said.

— John Roemer