Cases
CourtFilingsPetition dateMore filters
The court denied a group of stay-pending-appeal motions that sought to halt enforcement and implementation of Purdue’s confirmed Eighteenth Amended Plan. The stay fight followed the January hearing track for motions filed by Ellen Isaacs, Amanda Morales, Maria Ecke, Rosemary Walker, Mary Jannotta, Keith Redwood, and Laurie Danielle Pitts-Tillman, each targeting the confirmation order entered at Dkt. 8263 stay-motion hearing notice.
The denial mattered because the movants were trying to stop the plan before consummation. Judge Lane found that the movants had not shown irreparable harm and that a stay would substantially harm Purdue’s creditors by delaying the date on which the debtors could otherwise consummate the plan. That left Purdue free to continue moving toward effectiveness, trust funding, NewCo implementation, and creditor distributions while appeals proceeded stay denial order.
Judge Sean Lane confirmed Purdue Pharma’s Eighteenth Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan, overruling remaining confirmation objections and approving the settlement architecture that had been rebuilt after the Supreme Court’s Harrington decision. The order confirmed the plan after the November 12 confirmation hearing noticed in the case and found that Purdue satisfied section 1129, that solicitation and notice were adequate, and that the plan was the product of good-faith, arm’s-length negotiations through years of mediation confirmation hearing notice confirmation order.
The confirmed plan channels opioid-related claims into the trust structure, authorizes the Master Shareholder Settlement Agreement, and ties shareholder releases and injunctions to plan implementation. The economic centerpiece is up to $6.5 billion from the shareholder payment parties over 15 years, with proceeds flowing through the Master Disbursement Trust and creditor trusts for opioid abatement, victim compensation, and related distributions Eighteenth Amended Plan.
Loading defined terms…