¶ Corporate Ally
While in private law practice, Rep. Barr focused on “government entity defense” while at firms known for representing big business interests. Most notably, Barr repeatedly appeared as a lawyer for pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly against consumer lawsuits alleging the company “induced” doctors to prescribe its drug Zyprexa for non-FDA approved uses and “purposefully minimized” the drug’s significant health hazards. Ultimately, Barr was on the wrong side of these cases, with Eli Lilly later agreeing to a $1.4 billion Justice Department settlement—which included “the largest criminal fine” against a single corporation—over improperly promoting Zyprexa’s off-label uses and at least $1.2 billion in separate settlements over understating the drug’s health risks.
Barr, whose biggest career political contributor is a major coal company, has also vocally defended the coal industry, even using his House Financial Services Committee position to pressure megabank CEOs to keep financing fossil fuels.
¶ Rep. Barr Spent Stints In Private Law Focusing On Lobbying And “Government Entity Defense” At Firms Representing Business Interests After His Former Boss, Kentucky Gov. Ernie Fletcher Lost Re-Election In 2007 And After Barr Lost His Own First Congressional Campaign In 2010.
¶ After Gov. Fletcher Lost His Re-Election In 2007, Barr Returned To Private Law At Kinkead & Stilz, PLLC, Where He Focused on “Government Entity Defense” And “Government Relations”—The Firm Also Touted Barr’s Experience In Defending Business Against Liability Litigation And Employment Disputes.
After Kentucky Governor Ernie Fletcher Lost His Re-Election In 2007, Barr Returned To Private Law Practice, Handling Civil Litigation And Government Relations At Kinkead & Stilz. “Fletcher lost his bid for re-election in 2007, returning Barr to Lexington's legal community. Barr handles civil litigation and government relations at Kinkead & Stilz, where last year he reported about $105,000 in salary. He reported about $4,500 from teaching constitutional law at UK.” [Lexington Herald-Leader, 04/11/10]
- Barr Was An Attorney At Kinkead & Stilz, PLLC From January 2008 To March 2011. [LinkedIn Profile for Andy Barr, accessed 01/24/23]
Barr’s Biography At Kinkead & Stilz Stated He Concentrated On “Government Entity Defense” And “Government Relations,” Among Other Areas. “Andy concentrates his practice in the areas of civil litigation, real estate, energy, government entity defense, and government relations.” [Kinkead & Stilz PLLC via Archive.org, captured 05/30/2010, accessed 01/24/23]
Barr’s “Representative Experience” Included Representation Of Business And Other Entities In “Product Liability” And “Premises Liability” Litigation. “Representation of businesses, organizations and individuals in personal injury, medical malpractice, premises liability and product liability litigation” [Kinkead & Stilz PLLC via Archive.org, captured 05/30/2010, accessed 01/24/23]
Barr’s “Representative Experience” Also Included “Representation Of Corporate And Other Business Entity Clients,” Including Employment Disputes And Other Matters. “Representation of corporate and other business entity clients in a variety of contract, trade practices and employment disputes” [Kinkead & Stilz PLLC via Archive.org, captured 05/30/2010, accessed 01/24/23]
Barr Also Became A Lobbyist, Representing CC Intelligent Solutions Inc., A North Carolina Company That Sought To Contract With Kentucky’s State Government, With Barr Successfully Getting The Company An Interview With The Kentucky Secretary Of State “Simultaneously, Barr became a lobbyist. Last year, he lobbied in Frankfort for CC Intelligent Solutions Inc., a Raleigh, N.C., software company hoping to sell its product to Kentucky state government. Barr won the company an interview at Secretary of State Trey Grayson's office, but no sale resulted.” [Lexington Herald-Leader, 04/11/10]
¶ After Losing His 2010 Congressional Campaign, Barr Joined Miller Wells PLLC, Focusing On “Government Entity Defense,” “Government Relations,” And Energy Law, Among Other Matters—At The Time, Miller Wells Touted Its Reputation In “Aggressively” Defending Clients, Including The Banking Industry.
2011: After Losing His 2010 Congressional Campaign, Barr Joined The Law Office Of Miller Wells As An Of-Counsel Attorney, Focusing On “Government Incentive Procurement, Tax-Exempt Debt Financing, Government Entity Defense, Government Relations, Administrative Law, Commercial Litigation, Real Estate And Energy Law.” “Miller Wells: Garland ‘Andy’ Barr has joined the law office as an of-counsel attorney. He concentrates his practice in the areas of government incentive procurement, tax-exempt debt financing, government entity defense, government relations, administrative law, commercial litigation, real estate and energy law.” [Lexington Herald-Leader, 10/17/11]
- Barr Lost His 2010 Congressional Campaign. “[...] unsuccessful candidate for election to the One Hundred Twelfth Congress in 2010 [...]” [Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, accessed 01/18/23]
Barr Was An Attorney At Miller Wells PLLC From January 2008 To March 2011. [LinkedIn Profile for Andy Barr, accessed 01/24/23]
In March 2012, Barr Was One Of Eleven Attorneys Listed On Miller Wells’ Website:
[Miller Wells PLLC via Archive.org, captured 03/08/12, accessed 01/19/23]
As Of 2012, Miller Wells Stated It Handled Litigation Involving “Banking And Financial Services,” “Mineral Law,” “Creditor/Debtor Issues,” And Other Matters. “Established in 2005, Miller Wells PLLC is one of only a handful of Kentucky law firms focusing in complex commercial litigation and business planning. [...] The firm handles litigation involving appellate cases, banking and financial services, mineral law, insurance coverage, bankruptcy, reorganization and creditor/debtor matters, construction law, fraud and civil RICO issues.” [Miller Wells PLLC via Archive.org, captured 03/08/12, accessed 01/19/23]
Miller Wells Touted Its Reputation Of “Aggressively” Representing Its Clients. “We are the lawyers other lawyers hire. We have earned that reputation by aggressively and creatively representing clients at the highest level of professionalism.” [Miller Wells PLLC via Archive.org, captured 03/08/12, accessed 01/19/23]
At The Time, Miller Wells Featured Its Representation Of Financial Industry Actors Including “Commercial Banks, Finance Companies, Private Investment Funds And Other Institutional Lenders And Investors.” “Representing banks and banking customers, our lawyers have both prosecuted and defended cases involving lender liability, securitization of consumer debt, letters of credit and check warranties. Our banking and finance practice represents commercial banks, finance companies, private investment funds and other institutional lenders and investors, as well as borrowers and issuers of securities, in a wide range of financing transactions and related litigation.” [Miller Wells PLLC via Archive.org, captured 04/29/16, accessed 01/19/23]
2011: Barr Represented “Kentucky Derby Winning Trainer Richard Dutrow” In A License Dispute With The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission. “The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission on Wednesday denied a request by Kentucky Derby winning trainer Richard Dutrow that his license application, which a committee denied in April, be retroactively withdrawn. Racing's rules of reciprocity mean that the denial could cause Dutrow, who trained 2008 Derby winner Big Brown, to be refused licenses in other states. [...] Dutrow's attorney Garland ‘Andy’ Barr requested the retroactive withdrawal, saying Dutrow had previously been granted licenses in Kentucky and that Dutrow's situation hadn't changed substantially from previous years when he got a license.” [The Courier-Journal, 06/08/11]
¶ While In Private Law, Barr Repeatedly Defended Eli Lilly & Company In Lawsuits Over Its Drug Zyprexa, Including One Case Alleging The Company “Induced” Doctors To Prescribe The Drug For Non-FDA Approved Uses—Eli Lilly Would Later Pay The Largest Criminal Fine In Corporate History At The Time As Part Of A Related $1.4 Billion Justice Department Settlement.
¶ 2003: While In Private Law Practice, Barr Defended Eli Lilly & Company In A Lawsuit From A Consumer Who Alleged “Serious Injuries” After Being Wrongly Prescribed The Company’s Drug Zyprexa To Treat Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), When The FDA Had Only Approved The Drug For Schizophrenia And Bipolar Mania.
2003: Andy Barr Was Listed As An Attorney For Eli Lilly & Company In Ault Et Al. V. Eli Lilly & Company Et Al.:
[5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT Ault et al v. Eli Lilly & Company et al, 04/16/03]
- Rep. Andy Barr’s Full Name Is Garland H. Barr, IV. [U.S. House of Representatives History, Art & Archives, accessed 01/24/23]
- According To His LinkedIn Profile, Andy Barr Was With Law Firm Stites & Harbison PLLC From September 2001 To January 2004. [LinkedIn Profile for Andy Barr, accessed 01/19/23]
Barr—Associated With Stites & Harbison PLLC—Was Listed As Counsel For Eli Lilly In Its Answer To The Plaintiff’s Complaint:
[5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
Barr’s Filing Requested That The Plaintiffs’ Complaint “Be Dismissed In Its Entirety, With Prejudice” And That The Company Be Awarded Its Costs And “Any Other Relief To Which It May Appear Entitled.” “WHEREFORE, Eli Lilly and Company requests that plaintiffs’ complaint be dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice, that Lilly be awarded its costs herein, and that Lilly be granted any other relief to which it may appear entitled.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
Barr’s Answer To The Plaintiff’s Complaint Made Several Defenses About The Marketing Of The Drug Zyprexa:
- “Denied. Lilly admits only that it manufactures, tests, markets, distributes and sells prescription pharmaceutical products, including Zyprexa, to independent pharmaceutical wholesalers, including in the state of Kentucky. The remaining allegations in paragraph 5 are denied.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
- “Lilly admits that Zyprexa is among a group of drugs called ‘atypical antipsychotics’ that may be prescribed for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar mania and that Zyprexa is approved by the FDA to treat schizophrenia and bipolar mania. Lilly is without sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth or falsity of the remaining allegations in paragraph 9.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
- “Lilly admits that Zyprexa is advertised, but that the contents of the advertisements speak for themselves. The remaining allegations in paragraph 11 are denied.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
- “Lilly admits that it markets Zyprexa in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, but the remaining allegations are denied.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
- “Lilly admits that medical literature reporting on medical research involving Zyprexa is published in multiple medical journals. The contents of that literature speaks for itself. Lilly denies the remaining allegations in paragraph 17.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
- “To the extent that the averments in paragraph 38 are legal conclusions, no response is required and they are deemed denied. Lilly admits only that it had a duty to exercise reasonable care in the manufacture, labeling, marketing, distribution and sale of Zyprexa. Lilly denied that it breached such a duty.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
- “Lilly denies that the allegations of implied warranty set forth in paragraph 44 apply to Zyprexa.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
- “If Zyprexa was involved in the injuries or damages alleged in the complaint, which is denied, the use of that drug was not proper nor in accordance with the prescribed or correct procedures, and accordingly, the drug was abused, misused, and applied for purposes other than those which were indicated or intended by Lilly.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
- “At all relevant times herein, plaintiffs’ prescribing physician was in the position of a sophisticated purchaser fully knowledgeable and informed with respect to the risks and benefits of Zyprexa.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Answer to Complaint, 04/22/03]
In The Plaintiff’s Complaint, A Consumer Alleged That She “Sustained Serious Injuries” After Being Prescribed Eli Lilly Drug Zyprexa For Her Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Even Though The Food And Drug Administration (FDA) Had Only Approved The Drug For Treatment Of Schizophrenia And Bipolar Mania. “Plaintiff CONNIE AULT's physicians prescribed ZYPREXA for treatment of Plaintiff's post-traumatic stress disorder. Plaintiff CONNIE AULT ingested these products and sustained serious injuries, including diabetes. [...] ZYPREXA is among a group of drugs called the ‘atypical antipsychotic drugs’ prescribed for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar mania. ZYPREXA, although only approved by the FDA to treat schizophrenia and bipolar mania, was prescribed to Plaintiff for treatment of her post-traumatic stress disorder.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT Ault et al v. Eli Lilly & Company et al., Complaint, 04/16/03]
- Eli Lilly Designed, Manufactured, Distributed, And Merchandised The Pharmaceutical Zyprexa, Also Known As Olanzapine. “At all times relevant hereto, Defendant ELI LILLY designed, manufactured, tested, analyzed, distributed, recommended, merchandised, advertised, promoted, supplied and sold to distributors, and retailers for resale to physicians, hospitals, medical practitioners end the general public, a certain pharmaceutical product, hereinafter referred to as ZYPREXA (also known as OLANZAPINE).” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT Ault et al v. Eli Lilly & Company et al., Complaint, 04/16/03]
January 2004: The Judge Ordered That All Claims In The Case Be “Dismissed With Prejudice” And “Stricken From The Active Docket” Of The U.S. District Court For The Eastern District Of Kentucky:
[5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT, Order, 01/22/04]
¶ In The Lawsuit, The Consumer Alleged Eli Lilly “Induced” Doctors To Prescribe Zyprexa For PTSD And Other Off-Label Uses Although The FDA Had Not Approved The Drug To Treat The Condition.
The Complaint Alleged That Eli Lilly “Induced Physicians To Prescribe Zyprexa For Treatment Of Conditions For Which The FDA Had Not Approved Zyprexa, Specifically Including Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.” “ZYPREXA has been widely advertised by the DEFENDANTS as effective treatment for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, with fewer adverse side effects than other treatments. The DEFENDANTS further induced physicians to prescribe ZYPREXA for treatment of conditions for which the FDA had not approved ZYPREXA, specifically including post-traumatic stress disorder.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT Ault et al v. Eli Lilly & Company et al., Complaint, 04/16/03]
The Complaint Alleged That Eli Lilly “Aggressively Marketed And Sold Zyprexa By Falsely Misleading Potential Users About The Product” And “Fail[ed] To Protect Users From Serious Dangers” The Company Knew Or Should Have Known About The Drug. “The DEFENDANTS, beginning in 1996, aggressively marketed and sold ZYPREXA by falsely misleading potential users about the product and by failing to protect users from serious dangers which the Defendants knew or should have known to result from use of ZYPREXA.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT Ault et al v. Eli Lilly & Company et al., Complaint, 04/16/03]
The Complaint Alleged Eli Lilly Did Not Indicate To The Plaintiff’s Prescribing Doctor The “Known Danger” Of Hyperglycemia And Diabetes Associated With The Drug. “The known danger that the DEFENDANTS said product ZYPREXA was causing hyperglycemia and diabetes was never indicated by said DEFENDANTS to Plaintiff CONNIE AULT's physician who prescribed the product to Plaintiff. Plaintiff CONNIE AULT was ignorant of said defect of said product prior to ingesting ZVPREXA.” [5:03-cv-00166-KSF-JBT Ault et al v. Eli Lilly & Company et al., Complaint, 04/16/03]
¶ 2009: Eli Lilly Pleaded Guilty And Agreed To Pay Over $1.4 Billion In A U.S. Justice Department Case For Falsely Promoting Zyprexa For Off-Label Uses—The Case Included A $515 Million Criminal Fine, The “Largest Criminal Fine” Against An Individual Corporation In History At The Time.
2009: The U.S. Justice Department Announced That Eli Lilly & Co. Agreed To Plead Guilty And Pay Over $1.4 Billion For “Promoting Its Drug Zyprexa For Uses Not Approved By The Food And Drug Administration (FDA)”—The Resolution Included A $515 Million Criminal Fine, The “Largest Criminal Fine For An Individual Corporation Ever Imposed In A United States Criminal Prosecution Of Any Kind.” “American pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly and Company today agreed to plead guilty and pay $1.415 billion for promoting its drug Zyprexa for uses not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Department of Justice announced today. This resolution includes a criminal fine of $515 million, the largest ever in a health care case, and the largest criminal fine for an individual corporation ever imposed in a United States criminal prosecution of any kind. Eli Lilly will also pay up to $800 million in a civil settlement with the federal government and the states.” [U.S. Department of Justice, 01/15/09]
After The FDA Originally Approved Zyprexa For Short-Term Treatment Of Bipolar I Disorder And Schizophrenia, The Justice Department Alleged That Eli Lilly Wrongly Promoted The Drug For Off-Brand Uses Such As General Agitation, Aggression, And Depressions. “The FDA originally approved Zyprexa, also known by the chemical name olanzapine, in Sept. 1996 for the treatment of manifestations of psychotic disorders. In March 2000, FDA approved Zyprexa for the short-term treatment of acute manic episodes associated with Bipolar I Disorder. In Nov. 2000, FDA approved Zyprexa for the short term treatment of schizophrenia in place of the management of the manifestations of psychotic disorders. Also in Nov. 2000, FDA approved Zyprexa for maintaining treatment response in schizophrenic patients who had been stable for approximately eight weeks and were then followed for a period of up to eight months. Zyprexa has never been approved for the treatment of dementia or Alzheimer’s dementia. The criminal information, filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, alleges that from Sept. 1999 through at least Nov. 2003, Eli Lilly promoted Zyprexa for the treatment of agitation, aggression, hostility, dementia, Alzheimer’s dementia, depression and generalized sleep disorder.” [U.S. Department of Justice, 01/15/09]
The Justice Department Alleged That Eli Lilly Even “Trained Its Sales Force To Disregard The Law” In Promoting Off-Label Uses For Zyprexa. “The information alleges that Eli Lilly’s management created marketing materials promoting Zyprexa for off-label uses, trained its sales force to disregard the law and directed its sales personnel to promote Zyprexa for off-label uses.” [U.S. Department of Justice, 01/15/09]
The Justice Department Also Alleged That Eli Lilly “Expended Significant Resources To Promote Zyprexa In Nursing Homes And Assisted-Living Facilities” And To “Convince Doctors To Prescribe Zyprexa To Treat Patients” With Disorders Beyond The FDA’s Original Approval. “The information alleges that beginning in 1999, Eli Lilly expended significant resources to promote Zyprexa in nursing homes and assisted-living facilities, primarily through its long-term care sales force. Eli Lilly sought to convince doctors to prescribe Zyprexa to treat patients with disorders such as dementia, Alzheimer’s dementia, depression, anxiety, and sleep problems, and behavioral symptoms such as agitation, aggression, and hostility. The information further alleges that the FDA never approved Zyprexa for the treatment of dementia, Alzheimer's dementia, psychosis associated with Alzheimer's disease, or the cognitive deficits associated with dementia.” [U.S. Department of Justice, 01/15/09]
Eli Lilly’s $1.4 Billion Penalty Was Only “As Much As The Company's Zyprexa Sales In The First Quarter” Of 2008. “Eli Lilly has agreed to pay $1.4 billion, including the largest criminal fine ever imposed on a corporation. Ironically, that's about as much as the company's Zyprexa sales in the first quarter last year.” [CBS News, 01/15/09]
¶ Barr Also Appeared As Counsel In A Separate Consumer Lawsuit Against Eli Lilly Alleging “Serious Injuries” Like Diabetes Due To Zyprexa And Claiming The Company “Purposefully Minimized And Understated Health Hazards”—Eli Lilly Would Eventually Settle For At Least $1.2 Billion With 28,500 Zyprexa Users Who Alleged They Developed Diabetes Or Other Diseases.
2003: Barr Was Listed As An Attorney For Eli Lilly & Company In Cooper Et Al. V. Eli Lilly & Company Et Al.:
[6:03-cv-00422-DCR-JBJ Cooper et al v. Eli Lilly And Company et al, Attorneys, 08/04/03]
Barr Appeared As Counsel For Eli Lilly In Its Answer To The Plaintiff’s Complaint, Where The Company Denied A Variety Of Allegations And Requested That The Complaint “Be Dismissed, With Prejudice” And That Lilly Be Awarded Legal Costs And Other Relief. “WHEREFORE, Eli Lilly and Company requests that Plaintiffs' Complaint be dismissed, with prejudice, that Lilly be awarded its costs herein, and that Lilly be granted any other relief to which it may appear entitled.” [6:03-cv-00422-DCR-JBJ Cooper et al v. Eli Lilly And Company et al, Answer to Complaint, 08/11/03]
[6:03-cv-00422-DCR-JBJ Cooper et al v. Eli Lilly And Company et al, Answer to Complaint, 08/11/03]
In The Plaintiff’s Complaint, A Consumer Alleged “Serious Injuries, Including Diabetes, Pancreatitis And Ketoacidosis” After Using Eli Lilly’s Zyprexa. “Plaintiff CARL COOPER's physicians prescribed ZYPREXA for treatment of Plaintiff's schizophrenia. Plaintiff CARL COOPER ingested these products and sustained serious injuries, including diabetes, pancreatitis and ketoacidosis.” [6:03-cv-00422-DCR-JBJ Cooper et al v. Eli Lilly And Company et al, Complaint, 05/10/04]
The Complaint Alleged That Eli Lilly “Aggressively Marketed And Sold Zyprexa By Falsely Misleading Potential Users About The Product And By Failing To Protect Users From Serious Dangers.” “The DEFENDANTS, beginning in 1996, aggressively marketed and sold ZYPREXA by falsely misleading potential users about the product and by failing to protect users from serious dangers which the Defendants knew or should have known to result from use of ZYPREXA” [6:03-cv-00422-DCR-JBJ Cooper et al v. Eli Lilly And Company et al, Complaint, 05/10/04]
The Complaint Alleged That Eli Lilly “Purposefully Minimized And Understated Health Hazards And Risks Associated With Zyprexa,” Including Deceiving Consumers And Prescribing Physicians, And “Falsely And Fraudulently Withheld Relevant Information.” “The DEFENDANTS, and each of them, purposefully minimized and understated health hazards and risks associated with ZYPREXA. The DEFENDANTS, through promotional literature, deceived potential users of ZYPREXA and their physicians by relaying positive information, including testimonials from satisfied users and manipulating statistics to suggest widespread acceptability, while downplaying the known adverse and serious health effects of the drug. The DEFENDANTS falsely and fraudulently withheld relevant information from potential users of ZYPREXA.” [6:03-cv-00422-DCR-JBJ Cooper et al v. Eli Lilly And Company et al, Complaint, 05/10/04]
The Case Was Transferred To A Broader Class Action, In Re: Zyprexa Products Liability Litigation, Which Considered Multiple Allegations Against Zyprexa:
[6:03-cv-00422-DCR-JBJ Cooper et al v. Eli Lilly And Company et al, Transfer to MDL, 05/06/04]
- MDL 1596 Was In Re: Zyprexa Products Liability Litigation, Which Considered Multiple Consumer Allegations Against Zyprexa. “In re Zyprexa Products Liability Litigation, MDL 1596 (Chaffe McCall successfully represented Eli Lilly in numerous claims by individuals who claimed that ingestion of Zyprexa caused personal injuries and claims by the Louisiana Attorney General for alleged consumer protection violations.)” [Chaffe McCall, accessed 01/24/23]
January 2007: Eli Lilly Agreed To Pay $500 Million To Settle 18,000 Lawsuits From Consumers Who Alleged They Developed Diabetes Or Other Diseases After Using Zyprexa. “Eli Lilly agreed yesterday to pay up to $500 million to settle 18,000 lawsuits from people who claimed they had developed diabetes or other diseases after taking Zyprexa, Lilly’s drug for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.” [The New York Times, 01/05/07]
- The Settlement Covered Lawsuits In Federal And State Courts. “The settlement covers cases filed in state and federal courts by law firms or groups of firms for 18,000 clients, Lilly said. The federal suits have been overseen in Brooklyn by Judge Jack B. Weinstein of the Eastern District of New York.” [The New York Times, 01/05/07]
Following The January 2007 Settlement, Eli Lilly Had Agreed To Pay At Least $1.2 Billion To 28,500 Consumers Who Alleged They Were Harmed By Zyprexa—And There Were Still 1,200 Lawsuits Still Pending At The Time. “Including earlier settlements over Zyprexa, Lilly has now agreed to pay at least $1.2 billion to 28,500 people who said they were injured by the drug. At least 1,200 suits are still pending, the company said. About 20 million people worldwide have taken Zyprexa since its introduction in 1996.” [The New York Times, 01/05/07]
- Beyond The Settlement, There Were Still Ongoing Civil And Criminal Investigations By State Attorneys General And Federal Prosecutors At The Time. “The settlement will not affect continuing civil or criminal investigations of Zyprexa by state attorneys general and federal prosecutors.” [The New York Times, 01/05/07]
Lilly Was “Pleased” With The Settlement And Its Shares Were “Relatively Flat After The Settlement Announcement.” “Both Lilly and lawyers for plaintiffs said they were pleased with the agreement. With global sales of roughly $4.2 billion last year, Zyprexa is Lilly’s largest-selling drug and a major contributor to the company’s profits. Lilly shares were relatively flat after the settlement announcement. They rose 11 cents yesterday, to $52.36.” [The New York Times, 01/05/07]
Internal Documents Showed That During Clinical Trials, 16% Of Zyprexa Users Gained Over 66 Pounds, “A Far Higher Figure Than The Company Disclosed To Doctors.” “Documents provided to The New York Times last month by a lawyer who represents mentally ill patients show that Lilly played down the risks of Zyprexa to doctors as the drug’s sales soared after its introduction in 1996. The internal documents show that in Lilly’s clinical trials, 16 percent of people taking Zyprexa gained more than 66 pounds after a year on the drug, a far higher figure than the company disclosed to doctors.” [The New York Times, 01/05/07]
¶ Rep. Barr Has Taken At Least $4,000 From The Eli Lilly PAC.
Rep. Barr Has Taken $4,000 From The Eli Lilly And Company PAC:
| Date | Recipient | Contributor | Amount |
|
03/29/14 |
Andy Barr For Congress, Inc. | Eli Lilly And Company PAC | |
|
12/20/15 |
Andy Barr For Congress, Inc. | Eli Lilly And Company PAC | |
|
12/13/17 |
Andy Barr For Congress, Inc. | Eli Lilly And Company PAC | |
|
05/17/19 |
Andy Barr For Congress, Inc. | Eli Lilly And Company PAC | |
|
Total: |
$4,000.00 |
¶
¶
¶ 2016: Rep. Barr Celebrated The Passage Of H.R. 34, The 21st Century Cures Act, Which Made Industry “Ecstatic” By Making Drug Approval Standards “Significantly Lower” And Allowing Companies To Promote Off-Label Uses For Existing Drugs.
November 2016: Barr Issued A Press Release About His Vote For H.R. 34, The 21st Century Cures Act, Which He Said Would “Expedite The Discovery, Development, And Delivery Of New Treatments And Cures” And Give The Food And Drug Administration “Flexibility” To Expedite Approval Of New Drugs And Treatments. “Congressman Andy Barr (KY-06) today voted in favor of H.R. 34, the 21st Century Cures Act which includes numerous reforms to expedite the discovery, development, and delivery of new treatments and cures. Specifically, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will be given flexibility to expedite the review and approval of new drugs, medical devices, and treatments.” [Rep. Andy Barr, 11/30/16]
- December 2016: H.R. 34, The 21st Century Cures Act Was Signed Into Law. [Congress.gov, accessed 01/25/23]
Barr Claimed The 21st Century Cures Act Would Result In “‘Less Government Red Tape.’” “‘Passage of this bill will give hope to millions of Americans that we will find effective treatments and cures to diseases more quickly and with less government red tape,’ said Congressman Barr.” [Rep. Andy Barr, 11/30/16]
A PBS NewsHour Analysis Said Drug Companies Were A “Winner” Under The 21st Century Cures Act, After Over 1,300 Lobbyists “Roamed The Halls Of Congress” Influencing Lawmakers On The Bill, Most Of Them Working For Pharmaceutical Companies. “Winner: Drug companies [...] More than 1,300 lobbyists roamed the halls of Congress on the Cures Act, and disclosure reports show most of them were working for pharmaceutical companies. Their work has paid off.” [PBS NewsHour, 12/06/16]
The FDA Was Seen As A “Loser” Under The 21st Century Cures Act, Which Provided “Virtually Nothing To Improve Some Of FDA’s Longtime Problems,” Including “No Money” To Improve “Aging, Deteriorating Labs.” “Loser: FDA [...] The $500 million designated for the FDA is meant to pay for the agency’s new responsibilities under the Cures Act. There is virtually nothing in it to improve some of FDA’s longtime problems. The Government Accountability Office considers two of the FDA’s areas of focus especially ‘high-risk’: food safety and post-approval oversight of medical products that went through the fast track. There’s also no money in the Cures Act for aging, deteriorating labs, outside of headquarters, which Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf has said pose a serious problem.” [PBS NewsHour, 12/06/16]
The Pharmaceutical Industry Was “Ecstatic” Over The 21st Century Cures Act, Which Made Drug Approval Standards “Significantly Lower” By Replacing “Rigorous Double-Blinded Peer Review Studies” With Only A “‘Data Summary’” Provided By Pharmaceutical Companies. “Winners [...] Drug companies: It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the pharmaceutical industry is ecstatic over the law, as the bar for approval of drugs under development is made significantly lower by reducing the rigor required for approval of new drugs by the FDA. Traditionally, rigorous double-blinded peer review studies are required prior to consideration and approval. Under the new legislation, pharmaceutical companies will only be required to submit a ‘data summary’ for new pharmacological agents or new indications to existing products, which will make the introduction of new products far easier.” [Fierce Healthcare, 12/15/16]
- Headline: Hospital Impact: Drug companies win, patient safety loses with 21st Century Cures Act [Fierce Healthcare, 12/15/16]
The 21st Century Cures Act Allowed Drug Companies To “Promote Off-Label Usage Of Their Existing Products.” “Also, drug companies will be able to promote off-label usage of their existing products, which means that it will no longer be necessary to conform to previously approved indications, age groups, dosages or routes of administration of drugs currently on the market.” [Fierce Healthcare, 12/15/16]
¶ 2019: Barr Opposed H.R. 3, The Elijah E. Cummings Lower Cost Drugs Now Act As “‘Socialist-Style Price Controls’” That Would “‘Destroy The Progress’” Made Through The 21st Century Cures Act—AARP Supported H.R. 3 Because It Would “‘Crack Down On Drug Companies That Price Gouge Older Americans.’”
December 2019: Barr Issued A Press Release About His Vote Against H.R. 3, The Elijah E. Cummings Lower Cost Drugs Now Act, Claiming It Imposed “‘Drug Price Controls’” And Would “‘Destroy The Progress We Have Made Through The 21st Century Cures Act.’” “Congressman Andy Barr (R-KY) released the following statement regarding today’s House vote on two health care bills. ‘With prescription drugs among the key factors driving up the cost of health care, it is essential that we approve policies that both encourage innovation and protect consumers, particularly our seniors. H.R. 3 is no such policy. It will destroy the progress we have made through the 21st Century Cures Act and result in more than 100 fewer breakthrough cures for patients with cancers, rare genetic diseases and other serious, life-threatening issues. ‘I oppose H.R. 3 because its drug price controls will stifle innovation and will result in hundreds of fewer cures.’” [Rep. Andy Barr, 12/12/19]
- H.R. 3 Was The Elijah E. Cummings Lower Cost Drugs Now Act, Which Passed The House On December 12, 2019. [Congress.gov, accessed 01/25/23]
Barr Claimed H.R. 3 Would “‘Lead To Rationing – Ultimately Destroying Drug Research, Discovery, And Innovation.” “‘Unfortunately, H.R. 3 is no solution. It will dictate price controls for medications and lead to rationing – ultimately destroying drug research, discovery, and innovation.’” [Rep. Andy Barr, 12/12/19]
In A Tweet, Barr Called H.R. 3 “‘Hyper-Partisan’” And Claimed It Would “‘Impose Socialist-Style Price Controls’” And “‘Severely Compromise Americans’ Access To Life-Saving, Life-Improving Drugs, Therapies And Cures’”:
[Tweet by Rep. Andy Barr, 12/12/19, accessed 01/25/23]
AARP Urged Congress To Pass H.R. 3 Because It Would Cap Out-Of-Pocket Medication Costs Under Medicare, Allow Medicare To Negotiate Prescription Drug Prices, And “‘Crack Down On Drug Companies That Price Gouge Older Americans With Relentless Price Increases.’” “AARP is urging Congress to pass a prescription drug measure that would cap out-of-pocket Medicare medication costs and require the program to negotiate for lower prices on some high-cost medicines. ‘HR 3 would crack down on drug companies that price gouge older Americans with relentless price increases, forcing them to choose between taking their medicine and paying their bills,’ Nancy LeaMond, AARP executive vice president and chief advocacy and engagement officer, says in a letter sent Friday to the chairs of three powerful U.S. House of Representatives committees.” [AARP, 05/07/21]
- AARP Is “The Nation's Largest Nonprofit, Nonpartisan Organization” Representing Retired Persons, With Almost 38 Million Members. “AARP is the nation's largest nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to empowering people to choose how they live as they age. With nearly 38 million members and offices in every state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, AARP works to strengthen communities and advocate for what matters most to families — with a focus on health security, financial stability and personal fulfillment.” [AARP, accessed 01/25/23]
AARP Noted That House Republicans’ Alternate Bill, H.R. 19, The Lower Costs, More Cures Act—Which Barr Cosponsored And Vocally Promoted—Would Have A Much Higher Out-Of-Pocket Limit And Would Not Require Medicare To Negotiate Prices With Drug Companies. “HR 3, which was reintroduced by the Democratic majority in April, would initially cap at $2,000 the amount of money Medicare Part D prescription drug enrollees would have to pay out of pocket for their medicines each year. House Republicans have also introduced a prescription drug measure, HR 19, the Lower Costs, More Cures Act of 2021, which would set an initial $3,100 out-of-pocket limit. The GOP plan would not require Medicare to negotiate some prices with drugmakers.” [AARP, 05/07/21]
- Andy Barr Cosponsored H.R. 19, The Lower Costs, More Cures Act Of 2021. [Congress.gov, accessed 01/25/23]
- As An Alternative To H.R. 3, Barr Promoted The Lower Costs, More Cures Act. ““That is why I supported the Lower Costs, More Cures Act, a bipartisan solution that addresses the anti-competitive practices of companies that delay or even block access to a sufficient quantity of the brand name drug needed to conduct the bio-equivalency test required by the FDA as part of the generic drug approval process.” [Rep. Andy Barr, 12/12/19]
The Congressional Budget Office And The Joint Committee On Taxation Estimated That H.R. 3 Would Have Reduced Federal Deficits By About $5 Billion Over A Ten-Year Period. “CBO and JCT estimate that enacting the current version of H.R. 3 would increase direct spending by about $40 billion and increase revenues by about $46 billion over the 2020-2029 period. The net effect would be to reduce unified federal deficits by about $5 billion over that 10-year period.” [Congressional Budget Office, 12/10/19]
¶ Rep. Andy Barr (R-KY)—Whose Biggest Career Contributor Is Major Coal Firm Alliance Resource Partners—Has Called The ESG Movement’s Climate Focus “‘A Cancer,’” Introduced Legislation To Block Retirement Plans From Factoring ESG In Their Investment Decisions, And Has Directly Pressured Megabank CEOs To Keep Financing Fossil Fuels.
¶ January 2023: After His Swearing-In, Barr Said He Would Prioritize “‘Reining In Financial Regulators [...] That Have Been Weaponized By The Left To Advance A Radical Environmentalist Agenda’” Shortly Before Being Named Chairman Of The House Financial Services Subcommittee On Financial Institutions And Monetary Policy.
January 7, 2023: In A Statement Following His Swearing-In To The 118th Congress, Rep. Andy Barr Prioritized “Reining In Financial Regulators [...] That Have Been Weaponized By The Left To Advance A Radical Environmentalist Agenda, Making America Energy Desperate Instead Of Energy Dominant.” “Tonight, U.S. Congressman Andy Barr was sworn into office as the 118th Congress officially began. After his swearing in, Congressman Barr released the following statement: [...] At the same time, we must also begin conducting rigorous oversight of the Biden Administration from top to bottom. This includes reining in financial regulators at the Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Reserve, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Office of the Comptroller of Currency, and other federal agencies that have been weaponized by the left to advance a radical environmentalist agenda, making America energy desperate instead of energy dominant which has led to unaffordable energy prices for Kentuckians as a result.’” [Rep. Andy Barr, 01/07/23]
January 11, 2023: Barr Was Named A Member Of The Republican-Controlled House Financial Services Committee. “Today, the Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Patrick McHenry (NC-10), announced the new Committee members recommended by House Republican Steering Committee. [...] Republican Members of the House Financial Services Committee for the 118th Congress: [...] Andy Barr, Kentucky.” [House Financial Services Committee, 01/11/23]
January 12, 2023: Barr Was Named Chairman Of The House Financial Services Subcommittee On Financial Institutions And Monetary Policy, Where He Would “Oversee The Operations And Policy Development Of The Prudential Regulators, The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, And The Federal Reserve And Its 12 Reserve Banks.” “Today, U.S. Congressman Andy Barr (KY-06) was named Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Monetary Policy by Congressman Patrick McHenry (NC-10), Chairman of the full Financial Services Committee. In this role, Barr will oversee the operations and policy development of the prudential regulators, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the Federal Reserve and its 12 reserve banks; identify policies that grow and stabilize the financial system and broader economy; and champion best practices and policies that continue to strengthen the financial industry’s commitment to diversity and inclusion.” [Rep. Andy Barr, 01/12/23]
Barr Said Of His Subcommittee Chairmanship, “‘I Also Look Forward To Exercising Much Needed Oversight Of Other Key Financial Regulators, Including The OCC, FDIC, NCUA, CFPB And FSOC.’” “‘As the newly appointed Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Monetary Policy, I look forward to continuing the important work of oversight of the Federal Reserve System, both in its conduct of monetary policy and bank supervision. I also look forward to exercising much needed oversight of other key financial regulators, including the OCC, FDIC, NCUA, CFPB and FSOC, to ensure that both financial institutions and their regulators are facilitating a safe, sound, diverse and accessible financial ecosystem that fosters growth and competition,’ said Congressman Barr.” [Rep. Andy Barr, 01/12/23]
¶ December 2022: Barr Outlined The Incoming Republican-Controlled House Financial Services Committee’s Agenda To Combat Environmental, Social And Governance (ESG) Accountability, Calling The Movement A “‘Fraud’” And Claiming That Its Climate Focus Is “‘A Cancer Within Our Capital Markets.’”
December 2022: Barr Said Of The House Financial Services Republicans’ Anti-ESG Agenda, “‘We're Going To Have A Very Fulsome Agenda Combatting ESG, Highlighting ESG For The Fraud That It Is.’” “In a wide-ranging interview on Thursday, Barr — who will be a senior member of the House Financial Services committee in the new House GOP majority next year — dove into some of Republicans' anti-ESG plans. [...] ‘We're going to have a very fulsome agenda combatting ESG, highlighting ESG for the fraud that it is,’ Barr said, calling the climate-focused approach ‘a cancer within our capital markets.’” [Axios, 12/16/22]
- Barr Said The Agenda Would Have Two Phases, One Focused On Federal Regulators And The Other “Targeting The Private Sector, Including Banks And Asset Managers.” “Barr said there will be two phases of oversight — one focused on regulators, including bank regulators, the Federal Reserve and the Securities and Exchange Commission; and the second targeting the private sector, including banks and asset managers — paired with a legislative agenda.” [Axios, 12/16/22]
Barr Called The ESG Movement’s Focus On Climate Change “‘A Cancer Within Our Capital Markets.’” “In a wide-ranging interview on Thursday, Barr — who will be a senior member of the House Financial Services committee in the new House GOP majority next year — dove into some of Republicans' anti-ESG plans. [...] ‘We're going to have a very fulsome agenda combatting ESG, highlighting ESG for the fraud that it is,’ Barr said, calling the climate-focused approach ‘a cancer within our capital markets.’” [Axios, 12/16/22]
Barr Claimed That ESG Policies Are “Not A Market-Driven Phenomenon, Which Is The Opposite Of How Firms Like BlackRock And Vanguard Describe Them.” “Barr explained his philosophy is that these ESG policies are not a market-driven phenomenon, which is the opposite of how firms like BlackRock and Vanguard describe them.” [Axios, 12/16/22]
¶ December 2022: Rep. Barr Introduced A Joint Congressional Review Act (CRA) Resolution To Strike Down A Biden Labor Department Rule Allowing Retirement Plan Fiduciaries To Factor ESG Factors Into Their Investment Decisions.
December 2022: Rep. Barr Introduced A Joint Congressional Review Act (CRA) Resolution With Sen. Mike Braun (R-IN) To Strike Down A Biden Department Of Labor Rule Allowing Retirement Plan “Allowing Retirement Plan Fiduciaries To Consider Climate Change And Other Environmental, Social And Governance (ESG) Factors In Their Investment Actions.” “Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.) and Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) are attempting to dismantle a recent Department of Labor rule allowing retirement plan fiduciaries to consider climate change and other environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors in their investment actions. [...] That DOL rule, issued on Nov. 22, followed an executive order signed by President Biden in May 2021 that directed federal agencies to consider ESG policies. [...] Braun and Barr are introducing a joint Congressional Review Act measure that would nullify the DOL rule and prevent future, similar rules from taking effect.” [Axios, 12/16/22]
- Barr’s CRA Resolution Was Not Expected To Pass A Divided Congress Or Be Signed By President Biden. “The CRA legislation won't pass in a divided Congress, or with President Biden in office, but is designed to raise the issue's profile and force lawmakers to go on the record about where they stand.” [Axios, 12/16/22]
Barr Said The Biden Administration Was “Steering Capital Away From The American Energy Sector, Discriminating Against Oil And Gas Producers, Driving Up Prices At The Pump, And Preventing Investors From Reaping Returns From High-Performing Energy Stocks.’” “‘By finalizing rule-making allowing plan fiduciaries to consider ESG factors, Biden’s Department of Labor is steering capital away from the American energy sector, discriminating against oil and gas producers, driving up prices at the pump, and preventing investors from reaping returns from high-performing energy stocks,’ Barr told Axios.” [Axios, 12/16/22]
The Resolution Is “Designed To Raise The Issue's Profile And Force Lawmakers To Go On The Record.” “The CRA legislation won't pass in a divided Congress, or with President Biden in office, but is designed to raise the issue's profile and force lawmakers to go on the record about where they stand.” [Axios, 12/16/22]
¶ Barr, A Member Of The Congressional Coal Caucus Who Is “Focused On Strengthening” Kentucky’s Coal Industry, Has Claimed “Many Banks Are Under Siege By Far-Left Politicians And Activists Pushing Banks To Cut Off Or Restrict Access To Capital For The American Energy Sector” And Has Directly Pressed Multiple Major Bank CEOs To Continue Financing The Fossil Fuel Industry.
Barr Is “Focused On Strengthening” Kentucky’s Coal Industry, Among Other Sectors, And Is On The Congressional Coal Caucus. “Congressman Barr is also focused on strengthening Kentucky’s signature bourbon, equine, coal, agriculture and manufacturing industries, and serves as co-chair of the bipartisan Congressional Horse and Bourbon Caucuses.” [Rep. Andy Barr, accessed 01/13/23]
- Barr Is On The Congressional Coal Caucus. [Rep. Andy Barr, accessed 01/13/23]
September 2022: Rep. Andy Barr Claimed, “Many Banks Are Under Siege By Far-Left Politicians And Activists Pushing Banks To Cut Off Or Restrict Access To Capital For The American Energy Sector” In A Press Release About His Questions To CEOs Of The Seven Largest Retail Banks During A House Financial Services Committee Hearing. “With the consumer price index (CPI) continuing to skyrocket and Americans suffering from an unprecedented inflation crisis, U.S. Congressman Andy Barr (R-Ky) pressed the Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of the seven largest retail banks financing American energy companies to lower prices and rescue the U.S. economy from recession. Many banks are under siege by far-left politicians and activists pushing banks to cut off or restrict access to capital for the American energy sector and other politically disfavored industries.” [Rep. Andy Barr, 09/21/22]
Barr Asked JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, “Will Your Institution Commit To Continue The Financing Of American Coal Producers [...]?” “Mr. Dimon, do you believe that a coal company with a strong balance sheet, little or no debt and a demonstrable track record of credit worthiness should have equal access to conventional bank financing as a natural gas company with similar financial characteristics? [...] Jamie Dimon: Yes [...] Barr: Will your institution commit to continue the financing of American coal producers who are still needed and will be for some time to supply the most affordable and reliable source of base load power to the American economy? [...] Dimon: We are working with the responsible coal producers and utility companies, many of whom by the way, have dramatically reduced CO2 as we speak.” [Rep. Andy Barr, 09/21/22]
Barr Told Bank Of America CEO Brian Moynihan That The Economy Needs “More, Not Less Financing Of American Energy Exploration And Production.” “Barr: Mr. Moynihan, I'll spare you similar questions, but as you and I have discussed and notwithstanding your net zero commitment, I appreciate your focus that job number one is on addressing inflation, and to lower the rate of inflation, we cannot rely exclusively on Fed tightening, we must also address the supply side, and that means more, not less financing of American energy exploration and production.” [Rep. Andy Barr, 09/21/22]
Barr Said, “I Urge All Of The CEOs Here To Adopt A Similarly Measured Approach To Financing Fossil Energy.” “I urge all of the CEOs here to adopt a similarly measured approach to financing fossil energy.” [Rep. Andy Barr, 09/21/22]
As Early As His 2010 Campaign, Barr Said “We Should Aggressively Promote Kentucky’s Coal Industry.” “In Congress, I will promote more domestic energy production from multiple sources to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and create jobs. Expanding nuclear power as a reliable and efficient source of clean energy is an important long-term goal. In the meantime, we should aggressively promote Kentucky’s coal industry as a source of high paying jobs and an integral part of our nation’s overall strategy to achieve energy independence.” [AndyBarrForCongress.com via Archive.org, captured 02/20/10, accessed 01/13/23]
¶ Andy Barr’s Top Contributor In His Federal Career Is Alliance Resource Partners, The Eastern U.S.’s Second-Largest Coal Producer, Whose PAC And Employees Have Given Him At Least $219,500.
Andy Barr’s Top Contributor From 2009 Through 2022 Is Alliance Resource Partners, Whose PAC Has Given Him $44,000 And Whose Employees Have Given Him $175,500:
[OpenSecrets, accessed 01/13/22]
Alliance Resource Partners LP Is “The Second-Largest Coal Producer In The Eastern United States,” With Mining Complexes In Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia And A Coal-Loading Facility In Indiana. “As the coal industry’s first publicly traded master limited partnership (NASDAQ ticker symbol ‘ARLP’), Alliance is the 2nd-largest coal producer in the eastern United States. We are a diversified natural resource company that generates operating income from the production and marketing of coal and royalty income from coal and oil & gas mineral interests located in strategic producing regions across the United States. [...] We are currently the second-largest coal producer in the eastern United States with seven operating underground mining complexes in Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia as well as a coal-loading terminal in Indiana on the Ohio River.” [Alliance Resource Partners, LP, accessed 01/13/23]
Alliance Resource Partners LP Is Managed By, MGP, Its Sole General Partner. “ARLP, a Delaware limited partnership, completed its initial public offering on August 19, 1999 and is listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the ticker symbol ‘ARLP.’ We are managed by our sole general partner, MGP, a Delaware limited liability company, which holds a non-economic general partner interest in ARLP.” [Alliance Resource Partners, LP, accessed 01/13/23]
¶ Barr Defended Natural Gas Company Equitable Resources Inc. In A Lawsuit Filed By The Surviving Daughter Of A Worker Who Died In An Explosion And Fire At One Of Its Facilities.
¶ Before Joining The Kentucky Governor’s Office In January 2004, Barr Was A Lawyer At A Major Firm That Touted Its “Advocacy And Counsel For The Nation's Businesses,” With A Focus On “Complex Regulatory Issues” And Other Matters.
According To His LinkedIn Profile, Andy Barr Was With Law Firm Stites & Harbison PLLC From September 2001 To January 2004 And Did Not Start Working For The Kentucky Governor’s Office Until January 2004:
[LinkedIn Profile for Andy Barr, accessed 01/19/23]
As Of 2004, Stites & Harbison Billed Itself As A “Leading Regional Law Firm [...] Providing Advocacy And Counsel For The Nation's Businesses,” With A Focus On “Complex Regulatory Issues” And Other Matters. “Stites & Harbison is a leading regional law firm based historically in the Southeast and providing advocacy and counsel for the nation's businesses. The firm's attorneys focus on sophisticated transactions, difficult litigation and complex regulatory issues.” [Stites & Harbison PLLC via Archive.org, captured 01/22/04, accessed 01/24/23]
¶ 2003: While The Kentucky Governor’s General Counsel, Barr Was Listed As An Attorney For Natural Gas Company Equitable Resources, Inc. In A Lawsuit Filed By The Surviving Minor Daughter Of A Worker Who Died Following An “Explosion And Fire” At A Water Injection Plant.
2003: Barr Was A Counsel For Equitable Resources, Inc. In Walters Et Al V. Kentucky West Virginia Gas Company Et Al.:
[6:03-cv-00154-DCR Walters et al v. Kentucky West Virginia Gas Company et al, Answer to Complaint, 06/18/03]
- Rep. Andy Barr’s Full Name Is Garland H. Barr, IV. [U.S. House of Representatives History, Art & Archives, accessed 01/24/23]
- According To His LinkedIn Profile, Andy Barr Was With Law Firm Stites & Harbison PLLC From September 2001 To January 2004. [LinkedIn Profile for Andy Barr, accessed 01/19/23]
Barr Appeared In A Response To The Plaintiff’s Complaint Requesting That It Be “Dismissed With Prejudice” And That Equitable Resources Be Awarded Attorney’s Fees And “All Other Relief To Which It Appears Entitled.” “WHEREFORE, Defendant EQUITABLE RESOURCES, INC., requests that the Amended Complaint and the Complaint against it be dismissed with prejudice; for its costs and attorney's fees; for trial by jury; and for all other relief to which it appears entitled.” [6:03-cv-00154-DCR Walters et al v. Kentucky West Virginia Gas Company et al, Answer to Complaint, 06/18/03]
Walters V. Equitable Resources Et Al. Arose From An “Explosion And Fire” At A Water Injection Plant Operated In Conjunction With Natural Gas Wells In Eastern Kentucky That Resulted In The Death Of A Worker—The Lawsuit Was Filed By The Worker’s Minor Daughter And Their Estate. “Walters v. Equitable Resources et al. [...] This case arose out of an explosion and fire that occurred at the water injection plant that was operated in conjunction with natural gas wells in Eastern Kentucky. An equipment malfunction resulted in spill of petroleum-by- products which were ignited resulting in severe burn injuries to the well tender. Three days later the well tender died and suit was filed by his estate and minor daughter in the Perry Circuit Court.” [Frost Brown Todd, 12/31/04]
- The Case Was Moved To The Federal District Court In London, Kentucky And Remanded To State Court, Where It Was Appealed To The Sixth Circuit. “The defendants removed the action to Federal District Court in London, KY. Following dismissal of some of the parties the case was remanded to State Court but the dismissals and remand were appealed to the Sixth Circuit.” [Frost Brown Todd, 12/31/04]
2009: Equitable Resources, Inc. “One Of The Largest” Natural Gas Producers In The U.S., Became EQT. “Equitable Resources, Inc. (NYSE: EQT) today announced that, effective February 9, the company is officially changing its name to EQT Corporation (EQT). In conjunction with the name change, EQT(SM) unveiled a new brand, including a logo and the tagline, ‘Where Energy Meets Innovation(SM).’ Over the course of the past decade, the company has evolved into the largest natural gas producer in the gas-rich Appalachian Basin, and one of the largest in the country. In late 2008, EQT was added to the Standard & Poor's (S&P) 500 Index.” [EQT, 02/04/09]