Pondering the legitimacy of possible litahation

Although there is no pending case.
Could the states sue pharmaceuticals for the cost of rehabilitation of a citizens addicted to opiates and heroin where the addiction could be determined being stemmed from initial injury pain medicine dealing with the States were misinformed in determining funding for said pain medicine ocy cotton tylox ect.
And if given a hearing oroblle odds of moving forward to resolution settlement.

I am not a Lawyer bit this is a thought I have dwelled on in the past.

A fresh thought for the purpose of federal court I'd state vs state matters.
Effects of plastic pollution on cost lines the bottle debate and where redemtikn of containers is allowed states without redemtiin allowing returnables with complete disregard to consequences be allowed to pollute freely. This coast of coastal communities could be penalized against the states that do not take initiative for the eventual pillutio. Concerns is a 10000 year shelf life substance. It it gonna take a bit of raking just saying.

that's an interesting question that is probably pretty complicated to work through.  my initial thought would be that cases could be made.  it is analogous to the tobacco industry that sold a dangerous product and was very misleading in their marketing.  one obvious key difference is you have a middle man, so to speak, with doctors being the ones who actually prescribe these drugs to patients. 

i'm sure this has been thought of before and maybe tried before.  the fact that the pharma companies have massive amounts of money means it would not be easy to bring these cases.  they buy the politicians who make the rules governing who can sue whom. 

so, my thought would be that in theory, these could be viable cases, but in practice, who knows

The first argument my thoughts focus on an individuals petition being heard in California.
Where the plaintiff was allowed to proceed to a trial .
The second argument I believe presiddent was established in the clean air and water act in describing air pillutio. And this more visible water pollution.

It will be interesting if this is settled in the heroin addicts case if the plaintiff's attorney brings into the argument the revelsnce of the pharmscutical aggressive marketing technics and draw cohesive argument as it links the anology to big tobaccos aggressive marketing in the late 60's

As for the trash pollution I believe the Paris accord settled the concerns as equates water with air as necessary for life to flourish on confines of this planet and such polluting countries are responsible for the impact of environment they have exploited.
Possibly these issues are more a global nature and should be determined with rulings in Geneva international courts and WTO proceedings in their summit of the g 20

In Maine's latest round of propaganda heroin infomercial series.
The stated point is 4/5 heroin addicts were started by prescribed drugs. Official government sponsored state this correlating heroin to opiated. The treatment of those effected by unfair marketing practices during pharmaceutical companies but usually result in compensation and recall of product. Due to imposes health concerns.
It could be an interesting case

As for the attempts to sue Purdue pharmacy makers of oxy cottin Chicago tried in 2014 .
Washington city is in the process reports LA times articke Jan 2017. As for the individuals case. This was reported in March 14, 2017 and has been picked up by Reuters news feed. It is possible with pressidence set in these cases a road Mao to ag offices throughout the united states as a class action suit. Stick prices on the market could prereflect the opinion of the court.