Dec. 14 (UPI) -- A Kentucky court of appeals on Friday upheld a prior ruling for opioid manufacturer Purdue Pharma to release its secret marketing records.
The ruling comes after STAT, a healthcare journalism organization, filed a motion in court in 2016 to release concealed records from the pharmaceutical company, including a deposition former Purdue president Richard Sackler.
Purdue appealed that 2016 decision but lost their bid today following three-judge panel decision.
"We're tremendously encouraged by this ruling," said Rick Berke, the executive editor of STAT. "More than two years after we filed this suit, the scourge of opioid addiction has grown worse, and the questions have grown about Purdue's practices in marketing OxyContin. It is vital that we all learn as much as possible about the culpability of Purdue, and the consequences of the company's decisions on the health of Americans."
Related
Purdue announced it intends to appeal the latest decision, so the documents still wont be immediately available.
The motion filed by STAT in 2016 argued it has a constitutional right to the documents. This records come from legal proceedings that concluded by Purdue agreeing to pay $24 million to the state of Kentucky in 2015.
After the 2016 ruling, Judge Steven Combs, who presided over the case, wrote, "The court sees no higher value than the public (via the media) having access to these discovery materials so that the public can see the facts for themselves."
Today's ruling arrives after 40 states formed a coalition to probe the marketing practices of Purdue and other pharmaceutical companies.
That scrutiny prompted Purdue to launch a public outreach campaign in 2017, meant to stem the tide of the opioid epidemic. In early 2018, Purdue also agreed to stop marketing opioids to doctors,
Now, Friday's ruling gets the public one step closer to understanding more about how Purdue marketed its products.
"We have exhaustively examined legal principles underpinning Kentucky's common law right of access to court records," the ruling read. "We conclude that the Pike Circuit Court's ... order to unseal records is consistent with our analysis and well within the trial court's discretion."
