Latest Posts
U.S. National News

Walgreens and Subsidiaries Sued for Allegedly Filling Millions of Prescriptions That Lacked a Legitimate Medical Purpose

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

In a civil complaint filed yesterday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, the Justice Department alleges that Walgreens Boots Alliance, Walgreen Co. and various subsidiaries (collectively, Walgreens) dispensed millions of unlawful prescriptions in violation of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) and then sought reimbursement for many of these prescriptions from various federal health care programs in violation the False Claims Act (FCA). Walgreens is one of the country’s largest pharmacy chains, with over 8,000 pharmacies across the United States.

“This lawsuit seeks to hold Walgreens accountable for the many years that it failed to meet its obligations when dispensing dangerous opioids and other drugs,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “Our complaint alleges that Walgreens pharmacists filled millions of controlled substance prescriptions with clear red flags that indicated the prescriptions were highly likely to be unlawful, and that Walgreens systematically pressured its pharmacists to fill prescriptions, including controlled substance prescriptions, without taking the time needed to confirm their validity. These practices allowed millions of opioid pills and other controlled substances to flow illegally out of Walgreens stores.”

The government’s complaint alleges that, from approximately August 2012 through the present, Walgreens knowingly filled millions of prescriptions for controlled substances that lacked a legitimate medical purpose, were not valid, and/or were not issued in the usual course of professional practice. Among the millions of unlawful prescriptions that Walgreens allegedly filled were prescriptions for dangerous and excessive quantities of opioids, prescriptions for early refills of opioids and prescriptions for the especially dangerous and abused combination of drugs known as the “trinity,” which is made up of an opioid, a benzodiazepine and a muscle relaxant.

The complaint alleges that Walgreens pharmacists filled these prescriptions despite clear “red flags” that indicated that the prescriptions were highly likely to be unlawful. Walgreens allegedly ignored substantial evidence from multiple sources that its stores were dispensing unlawful prescriptions, including from its own pharmacists and internal data.

The complaint further alleges that Walgreens systematically pressured its pharmacists to fill prescriptions quickly without taking the time needed to confirm each prescription’s validity. Walgreens also allegedly deprived its pharmacists of crucial information, including by preventing pharmacists from warning one another about certain prescribers.

The complaint alleges that by knowingly filling unlawful prescriptions for controlled substances, Walgreens violated the CSA and, where Walgreens sought reimbursement from federal health care programs, also violated the FCA. The complaint alleges that Walgreens’s actions helped to fuel the prescription opioid crisis and that, in some particularly tragic instances, patients died after overdosing on opioids shortly after filling unlawful prescriptions at Walgreens. If Walgreens is found liable, it could face civil penalties of up to $80,850 for each unlawful prescription filled in violation of the CSA and treble damages and applicable penalties for each prescription paid by federal programs in violation of the FCA. The court also may award injunctive relief to prevent Walgreens from committing further CSA violations.

Click here for additional information.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice (Office of Public Affairs)

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading