Arizona now has misgivings over Purdue opioid deal

Arizona’s attorney general is having misgivings about agreeing to Purdue Pharma’s proposal to settle litigation over the opioid crisis.

Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, said in a court filing late Monday that the OxyContin maker has “sought to undermine material terms of the deal.”

He did not specify how he alleges the company has done that.

But in a statement Tuesday, Brnovich said, “It’s in everyone’s best interest to secure a just and timely settlement. Purdue and the Sackler family need to take responsibility for their role in the opioid crisis.”

Brnovich agreed to the Purdue settlement right before the company filed for bankruptcy protection as part of its settlement deal. The states that agreed to the deal, which could be worth $12 billion over time, were not supposed to object to the company’s request to halt litigation against it and members of the Sackler family that own the Stamford, Connecticut-based firm.

Purdue has said in court that the Sacklers may not be able or willing to kick in the $3 billion to $4.5 billion they’ve agreed to pay in the settlement if they must continue to face litigation across the country.

Purdue declined to comment on the Arizona filing, as did the office of the attorney general for Texas, which played a key role in reaching the settlement.

Brnovich has not gone as far as backing out of the tentative settlement. His spokesman, Ryan Anderson, said the state is “not interested in renegotiating terms that we’ve already agreed upon.”

He made waves in July, when he asked the U.S. Supreme Court to find that some of the Sackler money was fraudulently transferred from Purdue and to force family members to return it to the company so it could be part of any settlement with or judgment against the company.