Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bowerman v. Takeda Pharms. U.S.A.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

September 25, 2014

GREG BOWERMAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS A CLASS REPRESENTATIVE ON BEHALF OF ALL TAXPAYERS WITHIN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS, PETITIONER
v.
TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS U.S.A., FORMERLY KNOWN AS TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS NORTH AMERICA, INC.; TAKEDA GLOBAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER, INC.; TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL CO. LTD.; TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS AMERICA, INC.; TAKEDA CALIFORNIA, INC., FORMERLY KNOWN AS TAKEDA SAN DIEGO, INC.; TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS INTERNATIONAL, INC.; TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC.; ELI LILLY AND CO.; AND STEPHEN L. LAFRANCE PHARMACY, LLC, RESPONDENTS

CERTIFIED QUESTIONS FROM UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA. NO. 6:12-CV-01590-RFD. HONORABLE REBECCA F. DOHERTY, JUDGE.

Sutter & Gillham, P.L.L.C., by: Luther Oneal Sutter, for petitioner.

Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C., by: Lyn P. Pruitt and Kevin M. Lemley, for respondents.

BRYAN RUSSELL HUFFMAN.

DONALD M SPEARS.

MEGAN DOOLEY HARGRAVES.

JOSEPH WALKER WOODSON.

CORBIN, DANIELSON, and HOOFMAN, JJ., concur in part and dissent in part. CORBIN and HOOFMAN, JJ., join in this opinion.

OPINION

Page 840

KAREN R. BAKER, Associate Justice.

This case involves two questions of Arkansas law certified to this court by the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana in accordance with our Supreme Court Rule 6-8 (2014), and accepted by this court on January 9, 2014. See In re Actos (Pioglitazone) Prods. Liab. Litig., 2014 Ark. 3, 431 S.W.3d 275 (per curiam). The certified questions are as follows:

Does Article 16 § 13 of the Arkansas Constitution provide Greg Bowerman with a claim for illegal exaction under the facts and circumstances provided in this case? If so, does that claim extend to both theories proffered by Bowerman (i.e., product liability and unfair trade practices) and each of the remedies requested?
Is Nelson v. Berry Petroleum Co., 242 Ark. 273, 413 S.W.2d 46 (1967), still good law in Arkansas? Does Nelson embrace the expansive reading presented by Bowerman, or the more narrow reading argued by defendants, or is Nelson applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case?

We answer both questions in the negative.

Greg Bowerman, as a representative of a constitutional class-action of citizen-taxpayers of the State of Arkansas, brought a case against Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., formerly known as Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.; Takeda Global Research and Development Center, Inc.; Takeda Pharmaceutical ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.