The state of Alaska has terminated its contract with national plaintiffs’ law firm Motley Rice, accusing the South Carolina-based firm of violating confidentiality and conflict-of-interest provisions in ongoing opioid-related litigation. The decision follows a similar move by the state of Utah earlier this month.
According to an October 23 letter obtained by Reuters through a public records request, Alaska Attorney General Stephen Cox’s office said Motley Rice failed to disclose that it represented other clients in parallel opioid cases while working for the state. The letter also suggested that the firm may have shared confidential information obtained through its representation of Alaska.
The attorney general’s office confirmed that the state plans to hire new counsel to continue the litigation.
A growing setback for Motley Rice
Alaska’s decision marks another setback for Motley Rice, which Utah dismissed on October 16 from its own opioid lawsuits. Both states had enlisted the firm to pursue claims against major pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), alleging that the companies prioritized access to opioid painkillers despite known risks of addiction and abuse.
Motley Rice said in a statement that it had represented Alaska for nearly a decade and helped the state recover tens of millions of dollars in settlements related to the opioid crisis. “We are proud of our work for the state,” the firm said, declining to comment further on its response to the attorney general’s letter.
The firm has a history of taking on high-profile public health cases, including litigation against tobacco companies, lead paint manufacturers, and medical device makers, recovering billions in settlements since its founding in 2003.
Legal and ethical concerns
Court filings show that Motley Rice has represented multiple government plaintiffs in opioid-related cases, including local and state entities in Ohio. The Alaska attorney general’s office declined to comment on whether the firm’s dual representations could have compromised state interests.
Pharmacy benefits manager Express Scripts, which Alaska sued in 2023 for alleged deceptive practices contributing to the opioid epidemic, has denied any wrongdoing. The company has not sought to disqualify Motley Rice from the case, according to court records. Express Scripts’ parent company, Cigna, did not respond to requests for comment.
In Utah, OptumRx — another PBM — alleged that Motley Rice improperly accessed confidential information about the company’s operations through its representation of other public entities. The firm rejected the accusations, calling them a “six-times discredited argument” designed to disrupt its work.
Utah Attorney General Derek Brown’s office did not specify its reasons for ending the firm’s contract, saying only that the decision was made “in the state’s best interest.”
Motley Rice has dismissed OptumRx’s claims as “meritless,” maintaining that its representation of multiple government entities has always complied with professional ethics rules.
