The Civil Suit Law Essay Research Paper Coursework

Briefly introduce the general situation of this case, and then write whether you think this case is business ethics, whether you need to take responsibility (you can agree or disagree). No title, no reference! Be sure to write a full page, you can double space. Thank you!

ASHLEY COUNTY, ARKANSAS; Benton County, Arkansas; Cleburne County, Arkansas; Faulkner County, Arkansas, Plaintiffs,
Independence County, Arkansas; Chicot County, Arkansas; Conway County, Arkansas; Cross County, Arkansas; Fulton County, Arkansas; Jackson County, Arkansas; Lawrence County, Arkansas; Izard County, Arkansas; Monroe County, Arkansas; Nevada County, Arkansas; Pulaski County, Arkansas; Sevier County, Arkansas; Sharp County, Arkansas; Stone County, Arkansas; Woodruff County, Arkansas; Union County, Arkansas, Plaintiff-Appellants,
v.
PFIZER, INC.; PDK Labs, Inc.; Warner Lambert Company, LLC; Johnson & Johnson; Perrigo Company; John Does, 1 through 10, Defendant-Appellees.
No. 08-1491.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: September 22, 2008.
Filed: January 5, 2009.
662 *662 Brian Gene Brooks, argued, Greenbrier, AR, James J. Thompson, Jr., and Nolan E. Awbrew,
Birmingham, AL, James A. Simpson, Jr., Searcy, AR, and John M. Belew and Steve Bell, Batesviile, AR, on the brief, for appellant.
William F. Northrip, argued, Kansas City, MO, G. Spence Fricke, Little Rock, AR, on the brief, for appellees, Pfizer, Inc., Warner Lambert and Johnson & Johnson.
Stephen E. Scheve and A. Kyle Harris, Houston, TX, and Blair Arnold, Batesviile, AR, on the brief, for appellee, Perrigo Company.
Before RILEY, HANSEN, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
HANSEN, Circuit Judge.
Twenty individual counties in Arkansas brought this civil suit against Pfizer, Inc., PDK Labs, Inc., Warner Lambert Company, LLC, Johnson & Johnson, Perrigo Company, and various John Does (collectively
663 "Defendants"),each of whom manufactures *663 or distributes products containing ephedrine or pseudoephedrine. The complaint sought compensation to recoup the costs expended by the counties in dealing with the societal effects of the methamphetamine epidemic in Arkansas, with liability premised on the use of the Defendants’ products in the methamphetamine manufacturing process. Sixteen of the counties (collectively "Counties") appeal the district court's^] order granting the Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and we affirm.