7.85 +0.06 (0.77%)
Pre-market: 8:26AM EDT
|Bid||7.81 x 4000|
|Ask||7.83 x 4000|
|Day's range||7.75 - 8.00|
|52-week range||6.07 - 25.00|
|Beta (3Y monthly)||2.43|
|PE ratio (TTM)||N/A|
|Forward dividend & yield||N/A (N/A)|
|1y target est||9.78|
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (TEVA) closed the most recent trading day at $8.04, moving +1.26% from the previous trading session.
The Zacks Analyst Blog Highlights: Berkshire Hathaway, Apple, American Express, Kraft Heinz and Teva Pharmaceutical
(Bloomberg) -- A judge approved a bid by U.S. cities and counties suing opioid makers such as Johnson & Johnson and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. to negotiate a settlement as a group, in an effort to resolve the sweeping litigation over the addictive painkillers.U.S. District Judge Dan Polster in Cleveland, overseeing more than 2,000 lawsuits by municipalities, concluded that the negotiation class was necessary to reach a resolution acceptable to plaintiffs and opioid makers and distributors. The class is meant to bring together more than 30,000 U.S. municipalities, most of which haven’t yet filed suit.In a 40-page ruling, Polster said he was willing to back the “novel” idea of establishing a class before a negotiating framework is in place in order to speed a settlement that expedites “relief to communities so they can better address this devastating national health crisis.”The ruling comes as Purdue Pharma LP is nearing a $12 billion deal to settle claims it illegally marketed opioid painkillers, according to people familiar with the talks. Twenty-three states and three territories told the court Wednesday they’d support a plan under which the billionaire Sackler family, which owns Purdue, would file for bankruptcy protection and hand over the drugmaker to a trust controlled by the states, cities and counties that have sued.The $12 billion deal would cover only Purdue. But the two, parallel sets of talks going on -- one set including 48 states and the other the municipalities -- are global, including opioid distributors such as McKesson Corp. and Cardinal Health Inc. as well as manufacturers.Read More: Purdue Nears Deal Over Opioids as 23 States Agree to PactMore than 30 states opposed the local governments’ push to set up the negotiating class, saying it was too early for such a move and would interfere with their efforts to reach an overarching resolution of all suits. The class is a “novel procedure that could result in a grave miscarriage of justice and do significant harm to the ability of states to protect their own people,” Attorney General Ken Paxton of Texas said in a letter to Polster.The judge tapped plaintiffs’ lawyers including Jayne Conroy and Christopher Seeger as the class’s lead attorneys for the negotiations. Joe Rice, Paul Hanly and Paul Farrell are overseeing the cities and counties’ case as a whole.The approval of the class will let plaintiffs “use their joint bargaining power to secure the resources they need to fund addiction, recovery, and prevention efforts in their own neighborhoods,” Conroy and Seeger said in a statement. They said it would empower the plaintiffs “without inhibiting other ongoing litigation and settlements at the state, county, or local levels.”McKesson and Teva representatives declined to comment on the class’s approval. Jessica Castles-Smith, a J&J spokeswoman, didn’t immediately respond to phone and email messages seeking comment. Brandi Martin, a Cardinal Health spokeswoman, didn’t immediately respond to emails seeking comment.Read More: Sacklers to Remain Billionaire Family If Deal Is ReachedThe class, which cities and counties can escape only by filing an opt-out notice, will negotiate with more than a dozen opioid distributors and makers, along with some pharmacy chains, Polster said.The plaintiffs accuse the industry of conducting illegal marketing campaigns, failing to adequately oversee orders and ignoring red flags about unusually frequent retail sales. Almost 400,000 people died from opioid overdoses in the U.S. from 1999 to 2017, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.Some defendants involved in the talks have already agreed to settle claims rather than face a Cleveland jury next month in the first federal trial over responsibility for the U.S. opioid epidemic.Mallinckrodt Plc, a generic-opioid maker, agreed this month to pay $30 million to settle allegations it helped fuel the opioid epidemic and to resolve claims it faced in the Oct. 21 Cleveland trial. Last month, Endo International Plc’s units agreed to an $11 million settlement, while Allergan Plc signed off on a $5 million deal.The case is In Re National Prescription Opioid Litigation, 17-md-2804, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland).(Updates with McKesson declining to comment.)To contact the reporter on this story: Jef Feeley in Wilmington, Delaware at email@example.comTo contact the editors responsible for this story: David Glovin at firstname.lastname@example.org, Peter Jeffrey, Steve StrothFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Mallinckrodt's (MNK) shares gain as it agrees to sell its contract manufacturing unit to raise cash to settle liabilities from various opioid litigations.
(Bloomberg) -- Bearish bets against some of the top suppliers of opioid painkillers are paying off big as their stocks plunge on the potential of a costly reckoning for their role in fueling an epidemic of addiction to the drugs.Short-sellers in Mallinckrodt Plc, Endo International Plc and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., which are among the most exposed to opioid litigation, have pocketed $880 million since May 1, according to data from financial analytics firm S3 Partners. Shares of the three companies have lost between 67% and 95% in the last year as Wall Street attempts to quantify the billions of dollars in liabilities they could face and bankruptcy concerns mount.Bearish bets against Mallinckrodt have been the most profitable. Short-sellers have cleared $495 million since the start of May, when activity “started getting very active,” Ihor Dusaniwsky, S3’s head of research said by email. It was also right after new details of Mallinckrodt’s dispute with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services over rebates for its top-selling drug Acthar emerged.Mallinckrodt’s shares have since plunged to less than $2 from more than $15. A Bloomberg report on Wednesday that the company had hired a restructuring firm to advise on options sparked concerns from analysts that a bankruptcy filing could be imminent.Teva and Endo have troubles of their own beyond the opioid crisis as the copycat drugmakers are also named in litigation alleging that they colluded to fix prices for generic drugs. Endo bears are up $123 million since the beginning of May, while Teva shorts have reaped $262 million in mark-to-market profits, according to S3 data.While Mallinckrodt shares on Friday were clawing back some of Thursday’s 39% plunge, they were still down about 95% from a year ago. The company should be able to meet obligations on $700 million in debt coming due in April 2020, it’s the outcome of the ongoing opioid suits that’s the “wild-card” putting Mallinckrodt “in a precarious position,” SVB Leerink analyst Ami Fadia told clients in a note. She cut her price target to $2 from $7.To contact the reporters on this story: Cristin Flanagan in New York at email@example.com;Bailey Lipschultz in New York at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Catherine Larkin at email@example.com, Richard RichtmyerFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Mallinckrodt (MNK) plunges as the risk of filing for bankruptcy rises ahead of the multi-district opioid litigation scheduled next month.
Allergan (AGN) settles with two counties of Ohio for $5 million related to the upcoming multidistrict litigation for opioid-based drug abuse.
Thousands of pending opioid-abuse lawsuits against several pharma companies come into limelight after the Oklahoma ruling against J&J. Let's see what's in store for these companies.
Handicappers looking to estimate costs for drugmakers embroiled in opioid litigation, now have one, possibly anomalous, case for extrapolating predictions.
An Oklahoma judge ruled on Monday that large cap pharmaceutical company Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) would have to pay $572 million to the state.
AstraZeneca's (AZN) Fasenra gets Orphan Drug status for eosinophilic oesophagitis (EoE). A phase III COPD study on Breztri Aerosphere meets primary endpoint.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- In 1977, after an electrical fire destroyed the Beverly Hills Supper Club in Southgate, Kentucky, killing 165 people, a plaintiffs’ lawyer named Stanley Chesley came up with a novel way to recover money for the families of the victims. The fire made it impossible to know which company had made the aluminum wiring for the building, so Chesley sued every wiring company in the country, on the grounds that they all bore some blame because aluminum wiring was inherently dangerous. It worked: the plaintiffs wound up with about $50 million, most of which came, by definition, from companies that had nothing to do with the fire.Monday’s verdict against Johnson & Johnson – an Oklahoma state court judge ordered the company to pay $572 million for its role in the state’s opioid crisis – bears more than a passing resemblance to that old Kentucky case. States, cities and counties are suing any company that ever had anything to do with opioids no matter how marginal their role was in creating the opioid crisis. There are, at present, some 2,000 suits pending.In the Oklahoma case, the state attorney general, Mike Hunter, sued three companies: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Purdue Pharma Inc. and J&J. Teva and Purdue settled before the trial, which left J&J to, in effect, serve as a stand-in for the industry.But J&J is a lousy stand-in. It made two kinds of opioid-based pain relievers. One was a patch. It’s nearly impossible to extract fentanyl from a patch. The other was a pill that, unlike other companies’ pills, couldn’t be crushed and snorted. You could just as easily make the case that, with these drugs, J&J was actually trying to address the opioid crisis. The two products together barely had 1 percent of the market. (J&J also had a company called Janssen that made the raw material for opioids that they sold to the manufacturers, who then sold and marketed the drugs.)Tellingly, to make their case, the plaintiffs’ lawyers relied far more on documents from other companies than J&J’s own documents and emails. Usually, in these kinds of cases, there’s at least one smoking gun – a seemingly incriminating document that the plaintiffs’ lawyers can use to great effect. Not in this case.Not surprisingly, immediately after the verdict on Wednesday, J&J said it would appeal. Partly, of course, that’s because it doesn’t believe it did anything wrong. But it is also because it believes the law that was used to bring the case – Oklahoma’s “public nuisance law” – is being misapplied. As my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Noah Feldman noted, “A public nuisance is normally something like a smokestack belching pollution onto your land, or maybe loud music.”In a brief it filed with the court in late July, J&J wrote that if this interpretation of the public nuisance statute were allowed to stand, it would “threaten to jettison traditional product-liability rules and impose virtually boundless liability whenever the State – or a private plaintiff – alleges that commercial activity caused diffuse harm.”All over the country, lawsuits have been filed accusing opioid manufacturers and distributors of having violated public nuisance laws. Although three state courts – in Connecticut, Delaware and North Dakota – have ruled these cases invalid, in most other jurisdictions, the cases are chugging along. A small, privately-held company like Purdue Pharma lacks the financial might to fight them all.But Johnson & Johnson – with $81 billion in revenue last year and $20 billion in net profit – has plenty of money. And because it feels so aggrieved, it has no intention of rolling over for these lawsuits. That’s why it decided to go to trial in Oklahoma instead of settling along with the other companies.And thus the unintended irony: Presumably, the plaintiffs wanted J&J in the opioid litigation because its pockets are much deeper than companies like Purdue Pharma and Teva. It happens all the time: “deep pocket jurisprudence,” the Iowa Supreme Court labeled the practice in 2014. But in this case, J&J is going to use those deep pockets to turn the tables on the plaintiffs. It will use its financial and legal muscle to argue in various appeals courts that the opioid crisis, terrible though it is, is not a public nuisance in the legal sense. If it succeeds in getting this verdict overturned in Oklahoma – and I think it has a decent chance – it will likely have a domino effect on all the other cases predicated on local public nuisance laws.In which case, going after a company that had among the least to do with the crisis could end up letting the real bad actors off the hook.(The article originally stated the verdict in the Johnson & Johnson case was issued on a Wednesday. It took place on Monday, August 26.)To contact the author of this story: Joe Nocera at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Sarah Green Carmichael at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Joe Nocera is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering business. He has written business columns for Esquire, GQ and the New York Times, and is the former editorial director of Fortune. His latest project is the Bloomberg-Wondery podcast "The Shrink Next Door."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
(Bloomberg) -- While Johnson & Johnson’s stock got a boost when an Oklahoma judge ordered it to pay a much lower-than-expected fine for its role in the opioid epidemic, shares of some other makers of prescription painkillers are getting battered.Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and Endo International Plc reversed initial gains to trade near recent lows on Tuesday as Wall Street came to grips with just how much the opioid crisis could cost the manufacturers of those drugs. The pair of companies along with Mallinckrodt Plc are facing similar claims related to their role in the epidemic. Meanwhile, J&J shares extended their gains.Shares of Teva fell as much as 7.3% and remain down roughly 70% in the last year. Endo fell as much as 10%. Mallinckrodt shares declined 16%, on pace to extend a now four-day losing streak, to trade at a record low.The declines come as the ruling that J&J pay a $572 million penalty for fueling Oklahoma’s opioid epidemic, while less than expected, stoked concern that other states will follow with similar lawsuits against drugmakers. Future damages across the country could total $37 billion, Tom Claps, an analyst with Susquehanna Financial Group, wrote in a note.Bets against the companies that are most exposed to opioid risks have continued to rise through the year and into yesterday’s decision, data compiled by analytics firm S3 Partners show. More than 50% of Mallinckrodt shares available for trading are currently sold short while almost 20% of Endo shares are being shorted, S3 data show. Short interest in Mallinckrodt and Teva are at the highest level in at least a year.It is worth noting that earlier Mallinckrodt lost an appeals court bid to revive claims over Praxair Inc.’s generic version of its INOmax infant-respiratory medicine.To contact the reporter on this story: Bailey Lipschultz in New York at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Catherine Larkin at email@example.com, Richard Richtmyer, Cristin FlanaganFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
A court ordered J&J (JNJ) to pay $527 million in the Oklahoma litigation related to abuse of its opioid-based drugs. The company is facing similar litigation in multiple states.
Johnson & Johnson has a much broader revenue base than Teva. The company also has a solid presence in the medical devices and consumer healthcare areas.