In a Zoom press conference after the verdict, lead trial counsel Mark Lanier said he plans to ask for $1.1 billion and $1.3 billion for the counties, though he didn't specify which. 

"Should the judge find in favor of those numbers or whatever numbers he assigns, I'd love to say that the money will be disbursed and the problem will be abated and we will see thriving communities overnight. But regrettably, that won't be the case," Lanier said. "We expect that the companies will appeal these decisions; that they will appeal them all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And that's a process that can take years."

Lanier's co counsel, Peter Weinberger of Spangenberg Shibley & Liber LLP, said the damages phase is to begin in early April or early May, with Polster setting aside nine trial days to hear evidence.

"We have health economists, we have epidemiologists, we have people who have come into Lake and Turnbull counties and evaluated what it is in terms of programs that are necessary to provide treatment for addiction alternative medical treatment, education to the communities, help with foster care help with judicial system.

Weinberger said they know the numbers sound large, but they know they need long-term funding for a long-term solution.

"This is not just something that you throw money at today or for the next six months or for a year," Weinberger said.

Tuesday's verdict follows a bench trial in Orange County, California, that ended with a tentative defense verdict, and it comes on the heels of the Oklahoma Supreme Court tossing a $465 million judgment against Johnson & Johnson over public nuisance claims brought by the state's attorney general. 

In Tuesday's Zoom conference, Joe Rice of Motley Rice, a member of the plaintiffs executive committee, said some losses are to be expected. 

"Like we did in asbestos, we're going to try a lot of cases and we're going to lose some, but we're going to win this war. And at the end of the day, American juries are going to tell the manufacturers and the distributers and the pharmacies that it's time for them to step up and take their share of the responsibility for the devastation that flowed from their sales of the opioid product," Rice said. "For 15 years now they're bene counting the money. It's now time for them to pay the communities for the damages they caused."

Asked how the verdict could impact global settlement discussions, Rice said, "You can be sure that the message from this jury is going to be talked about in the board room of every corporation that's in the pharmaceutical chain."

"The time for them to try to make a reasoned resolution is before we end up with a lot of jury verdicts," Rice said. "So we look forward to the opportunity to meet with them and hopefully put together a global resolution that helps all subdivisions across the country that stepped up and led this litigation."

Asked why he was relying on public nuisance theories, Rice said, "You gotta start somewhere."

"We can always go back and try a straight negligence or careless standard," Rice said. "There's different ways to proceed with these cases. The public nuisance was the one we chose to proceed with because the court controls the remedy and there was no risk that any economic recovery would be used for anything other than to abate the opioid epidemic. And that's what the clients wanted to have happen."

The lawyers were joined on Zoom by representatives of the two counties, including Lake County Planning Director Jason Boyd. Boyd said the verdict will accelerate the county's social services programs, naming job and family services and foster children support programs as examples.

Kim Fraser, executive director of the Lake County Board of Alcohol, Drug Addiction and Mental Health Services, said the verdict gives voice to traumatized families.

"Truly in Lake County, we have not had a corner of the county that has not been impacted by this epidemic," Fraser said.

In addition to the first opioid jury verdict, the trial was the first to focus on pharmacies that sell opioids, which are the basis for prescription painkillers such as OxyContin. Other trials have involved the manufacturers and distributors of opioids.

It began Oct. 4 and ended with closing arguments Nov. 15. Jurors began deliberating Nov. 16.

A statement released Tuesday by the plaintiffs' executive committee said the verdict "represents a milestone victory for the Lake County and Trumbull County communities, and the entire country, in the fight against the opioid epidemic."

"For decades, pharmacy chains have watched as the pills flowing out of their doors cause harm and failed to take action as required by law. Instead, these companies responded by opening up more locations, flooding communities with pills, and facilitating the flow of opioids into an illegal, secondary market," according to the statement. "The judgment today against Walmart, Walgreens and CVS represents the overdue reckoning for their complicity in creating a public nuisance."

The statement referenced the looming battle over damages, saying, "Our work is not finished."

"Our focus now will be to ensure the Lake and Trumbull communities have the funds they need to support proven opioid abatement programs and strategies."

The trial is the second bellwether selection from the multidistrict litigation.

The first was a bench trial between two West Virginia counties and three distributors, McKesson, Cardinal Health and AmerisourceBergen. It ended last summer, but U.S. District Judge David Faber of the Southern District of West Virginia has yet to issue his verdict.

In addition to Rice, Lanier and Weinberger, the MDL's plaintiffs' executive committee includes Jayne Conroy of Simmons Hanly Conroy, Paul T. Farrell Jr. of Farrell and Fuller and Frank L. Gallucci III of Plevin & Gallucci.

Read more: 

• Appeals court nixes 'negotiation class' created for opioid settlement
• New lawsuit unveils scope of Purdue's 'extraordinary efforts' to push opioids
• Opioid manufacturers: A public nuisance?