HUNTINGTON, W.Va. (WCHS) — An appeals court vacated a previous ruling in the city of Huntington and Cabell County’s case against opioid distributors, reviving a public nuisance lawsuit against three of the nation’s largest distributors.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the city and county Tuesday, remanding the case for further proceedings after U.S. District Judge David Faber ruled in 2022 in favor of the distributors, saying at the time that the state's common law of public nuisance did not cover the sale and distribution of the dangerous prescription drugs.

A federal appeals court questioned the West Virginia State Supreme Court in the case who then sent the appeal to the circuit court in a 3-2 opinion earlier this year. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling on Tuesday revives the case.

In its opinion, the circuit court said Faber used too narrow of an interpretation of West Virginia law regarding public nuisance and distributor duties and asked him to reconsider the evidence under a broader scope, focusing instead on the distributors’ conduct and the alleged impact, as well as applying the correct standards for public nuisance.

The circuit court also found that Faber failed to consider evidence showing the distributors raised pharmacy order limits, potentially enabling large shipments and avoiding suspicious order reporting rules.

"The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has held what the City argued and believes – that distributors of opioids have a legal duty to prevent the diversion of highly addictive opioids, and that we are able to seek to hold them accountable for the devastating harm that they have caused our city and far too many of its families,” Huntington Mayor Patrick Farrell said in a statement. “We look forward to a new day in court and the chance to apply the law to provide relief for the residents of our community."

The city had argued in its 2017 lawsuit that AmerisourceBergen Drug Co., Cardinal Health Inc. and McKesson Corp. caused a public health crisis by distributing 81 million pills over eight years in the county and ignoring the growing signs of addiction.

Faber said West Virginia’s Supreme Court had only applied public nuisance law in the context of conduct that interferes with public property or resources.

An appeals court in Richmond, Va., then sent a certified question to the West Virginia Supreme Court in 2024 asking whether conditions caused by the distribution of a controlled substance constitute a public nuisance.

The majority of West Virginia's justices refused to get involved, sending the case back to the circuit court.

Thousands of state and local governments have sued over the toll of opioids. The suits relied heavily on claims that the companies created a public nuisance by failing to monitor where the powerful prescriptions were ending up.

Most of the lawsuits were settled as part of a series of nationwide deals that could be worth more than $50 billion.

The appeals court had noted that the West Virginia Mass Litigation Panel, which works to resolve complex cases in state court, has concluded in several instances that opioid distribution “can form the basis of a public nuisance claim under West Virginia common law.”

As of 2017, more than 10% of the nearly 150,000 people living in Cabell County were or had been addicted to opioids, court records said.

The city and county had sought more than $2.5 billion that would have gone toward opioid use prevention, treatment and education over 15 years.

A statement from the Motley Rice said the law firm looked forward to a new day in court:

The people of Huntington, W.Va., know the true human cost of the opioid epidemic. While significant strides have been made nationwide, the rate of overdose deaths remains stubbornly high in West Virginia, exceeding that of every other state in the country. The Fourth Circuit reached the same conclusion we did at the outset of this litigation – the crisis faced by Huntington and its neighbors can constitute a public nuisance under West Virginia law. We too hold firm in our belief that opioid distributors and pharmacy benefit managers must be held accountable for their actions and come to the table to fix the damage.

It’s unclear when a new hearing in the case would take place.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.