Justia Constitutional Law Opinion Summaries

Articles Posted in Health Care Law
Petitioner, as a representative of a constitutional class-action of citizen-taxpayers of the State, brought a case against Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A. and related companies (collectively, Respondents), alleging that an illegal exaction had taken place. Respondents were engaged in the business of developing, manufacturing, and selling “Actos” for the treatment of Type II diabetes mellitus. Actos was prescribed by physicians in Arkansas, and certain amounts of the payments for these drugs were reimbursed by the state. Respondents filed a motion to dismiss, alleging that Petitioner failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The federal district court certified questions of law to the Supreme Court regarding the issues presented in this case. The Supreme Court answered that Ark. Const. art. 16, 13 does not provide Petitioner with a claim for illegal exaction under the facts and circumstances of this case.View "Bowerman v. Takeda Pharms. U.S.A." on Justia Law