Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Purdue Pharma, L.P. et al.1, 36 Mass. L. Rep. 111

Summary

HOLDINGS: [1]-Individual board members of an opioid manufacturer were not entitled to dismissal of the Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A claims against them pursuant to Mass. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) because the allegations in the complaint were specific and detailed enough to satisfy the prima facie burden of proof outlined in Cepeda v. Kass. The Commonwealth met its burden under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 223A, §3(c), of producing evidence showing that each of the named defendants participated in making or approving false representations knowingly sent into Massachusetts with the intent that Massachusetts residents rely on those misrepresentations, resulting in injury to them; [2]-The exercise of personal jurisdiction comported with due process because, in part, intentional misrepresentations and deceptive conduct were alleged to have occurred through marketing efforts targeted at and sent to Massachusetts.