Summary
The Fourth Circuit granted in part Express Scripts’ petition for a writ of mandamus concerning a public-nuisance action brought by West Virginia local governments related to opioid distribution. The court held that the plaintiffs’ requested abatement fund included legal remedies that triggered Express Scripts’ Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. The court declined to grant mandamus concerning the district court’s proposed statewide abatement trial because any overbroad relief could be challenged on direct appeal.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether mandamus was an appropriate means to review the district court's denial of Express Scripts's Seventh Amendment demand for a jury trial.
- Whether the proposed abatement fund, including addiction treatment, rehabilitation, education, and other compensation for downstream opioid-related harms, was legal rather than equitable relief under the historical Seventh Amendment inquiry.
- Whether mandamus should issue to challenge the district court's proposed statewide abatement trial and the order in which the related actions would be tried.
Holdings
- A petition for a writ of mandamus is the proper means in the Fourth Circuit to challenge denial of the constitutional right to a jury trial, and the court may consider the merits of the jury demand through mandamus.
- The Seventh Amendment entitles Express Scripts to a jury trial because the proposed abatement fund includes compensation for downstream consequences of the alleged public nuisance, including addiction treatment, rehabilitation, education, and related programs. Such compensation would have been awarded by courts of law, not courts of equity, in 1791.
- Mandamus is not warranted on the statewide-trial issue because Express Scripts may challenge any relief exceeding what is necessary to redress the plaintiffs on direct appeal.
Key quotations
“The Seventh Amendment entitles litigants to a jury trial unless the claim would have been heard, and the remedy awarded, by courts of equity at the Founding.” (2)
“Equity’s jurisdiction stopped at abatement.” (17)
“whether a monetary remedy is legal” turns on what it is “designed” to do.” (23)
“The remedy is therefore legal, and the Seventh Amendment guarantees a jury trial.” (25)
Factual background
The plaintiffs, 120 West Virginia cities, towns, and counties, alleged that Express Scripts, a pharmacy benefit manager, contributed to an oversupply and diversion of opioids that interfered with public health and safety. They sought an injunction and an abatement fund covering removal of the opioid oversupply as well as addiction treatment, rehabilitation, education, and related community programs. The district court ordered a bifurcated bench trial, while Express Scripts maintained that the requested monetary relief was legal in nature and triggered the Seventh Amendment jury-trial right.
Procedural history
One hundred twenty West Virginia local governments sued Express Scripts for public nuisance based on its alleged contribution to an opioid oversupply. The district court denied Express Scripts's jury demand, characterized the requested relief as equitable abatement, and ordered a bifurcated bench trial involving a proposed statewide abatement remedy. The district court also denied reconsideration and declined to stay or coordinate the action with a materially similar action brought by the West Virginia Attorney General, although it later consolidated the actions for discovery. The Fourth Circuit granted mandamus in part to require a jury trial but declined to grant mandamus concerning the order of a statewide trial.
Remand instructions
The district court must provide Express Scripts a jury trial on the public-nuisance claim. The court of appeals did not grant mandamus concerning the proposed statewide trial or the order in which the plaintiffs' and Attorney General's cases must be tried.