Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : wla(warner lambert) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Anthony Wong who wrote (555)	2/20/1999 10:13:00 AM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 942

Drug Cos. Settle Price Gouging Suit A.P. INDEXES: TOP STORIES \| NEWS \| SPORTS \| BUSINESS \| TECHNOLOGY \| ENTERTAINMENT Filed at 6:08 p.m. EST By The Associated Press SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Nineteen drug makers have agreed to pay more than $176 million to settle a class-action lawsuit alleging they gouged the public by overcharging for medicines sold through independent pharmacies. As part of the deal, the companies will furnish $148 million worth of brand-name drugs to 300 nonprofit California medical clinics that provide drugs to the poor. The manufacturers would pay $1.6 million to administer the three-year program. Under the settlement, given preliminary court approval Thursday, the companies could pay as much as $27 million in fees to attorneys for the plaintiffs. Merck & Co. would pay the most, more than $19 million, while Carter Wallace would pay the least, at $705,000. Nine companies named in the suit did not join in the settlement. ''We view this to be an exceptional result,'' said plaintiffs' attorney Bill Bernstein. ''The cost of auditing claims and distributing money would eat up so much of the benefit that we thought we could do so much public good by distributing through the public health community.'' In a federal case filed in Chicago, many of the same companies agreed three years ago to pay $700 million to settle allegations they conspired to charge pharmacists more than health maintenance organizations and other big volume buyers like mail-order drug firms. Several companies declined to take part in the Chicago settlement, and when they went to trial the judge dismissed the case. Although federal law does not allow it, California law allows suits to be filed on behalf of so-called ''indirect purchasers'' -- in this case prescription drug users who bought the products from pharmacies and not directly from the companies themselves. Last December, a judge approved a $64.3 million settlement between 10 states and the District of Columbia and the world's largest drug companies in a lawsuit that charged the manufacturers conspired to destroy competition between retailers and health maintenance organizations. Merck spokesman John Doorley said the company settled the California case ''rather than risk an inaccurate verdict. We price our products competitively and fairly in response to market pressure and we never have been involved in any price conspiracy.'' Lowell Weiner, a spokesman for American Home Products Corp., said the companies ''agreed to the settlement solely to avoid the burden and expense of litigation.'' Bernstein said the suit did not quantify the discrepancy in pricing, calling it ''a hotly contested issue.'' He said the alleged price gouging affected mostly people who do not belong to HMOs or are not covered by government insurance programs such as Medicaid. But druggists have claimed they paid up to $28.90 for 100 tablets of a synthetic thyroid drug, while HMOs paid as little as $1.43. Fred Mayer, a Sausalito, Calif., pharmacist, said the agreement ''represents a cheap settlement for the drug companies, and they'll go on, business as usual, ripping off the public.'' Bernstein said Mayer's view was not representative of most class members. ''This is a very substantial and important benefit they're going to receive,'' he said. Others companies involved in the settlement are:Glaxo Wellcome, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, SmithKline Beecham, Pharmacia & Upjohn, Schering-Plough, Zeneca, Warner Lambert, Abbott, Rhone-Poulenc, Dupont, Boehringer Ingleheim and Knoll. Companies named in the class-action lawsuit that did not join the settlement are: Ciba-Geigy, G.D. Searle, Hoffmann LaRoche, Johnson & Johnson, Marion Merrell Dow, Ortho Pharmaceutical, Purdue-Frederick, Forest Laboratories and Sandoz Pharmaceuticals. Related Information From Hoover's Inc. Rhone Poulenc Schering Plough Johnson & Johnson Forest Labs Bristol Myers Squibb Warner Lambert Knoll Inc Merck & Co Pharmacia & Upjohn Inc Carter-Wallace, Inc. Lilly, Eli Smithkline Beecham PLC