LegalNewsLine Logo  
Friday, July 25 2008     Subscribe in NewsGator Online
News | Contact LegalNewsline | About Us | Advertise | RSS
Enter search keyword
 
NEWSLETTER
Receive our FREE weekly newsletter
click here
LNL MOST POPULAR ARTICLES
+ Bailey's contributions at issue in Pennsylvania case
+ Not just AGs sicking outside counsel on big business
+ Oklahoma AG featured in anti-gay campaign flyer
+ Judiciary Committee to probe 'pro-business' Supreme Court rulings
+ Utah AG allows workers a 4-day work week
LNL HOT TOPICS
+ Asbestos
+ Big Pharma
+ Class Action
+ Dickie Scruggs
+ Gasoline Prices
+ Global Warming
+ Hurricane Katrina
+ Lead Paint
+ Personal Injury
+ Sub-Prime Mortgages
+ Tobacco
+ Tort Reform
U.S. Supreme Court 
 
'Light' smoke suits look shaky as USSC takes case
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The fate of billions of dollars in potential lawsuit damages awards against Big Tobacco over "light cigarettes" now lies with the U.S. Supreme Court.

The USSC agreed last week to review a federal appeals court ruling that a class action fraud suit (Altria v. Good, 07-562) brought by smokers in Maine against Altria Group's Philip Morris USA (PMUSA) could proceed. Plaintiffs claim Philip Morris falsely advertised light cigarettes as containing less tar and nicotine.

More than 30 such suits against Big Tobacco are currently pending in courts around the country, reports note. A federal class action suit pending in New York that claims Big Tobacco violated anti-racketeering laws in promoting light cigarettes could contain up to 60 million smokers, AP reported.

In probably the best-known lights lawsuit, the Illinois Supreme Court finally struck down last August a $10.1 billion punitive-damages award in a similar class-action against PMUSA, LNL reported. The Madison County Circuit Court originally granted the award in 2003 on behalf of three million smokers.

Plaintiffs in this suit argue that the USSC has already set a precedent. "Our position is supported by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Cipollone v. Liggett Group, where the Court held that when tobacco companies affirmatively lie, they can be sued for fraud in state court," lead counsel Gerard Mantese stated in a press release.

But financial analysts figure the top bench decision to hear the case bodes ill for the latest decision. A Morgan Stanley analyst wrote that overturning the result and disallowing the suit would sound "the death knell" for other such actions, Bloomberg reported.


Filed Under: U.S. Supreme Court


COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

No comments have been posted in the last 15 days!

SEND US YOUR COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:


* - Required fields

Subject: *
Message: *
Contact Name: *
Contact URL:
Contact Email: *
This Is CAPTCHA Image
Write the characters in the image above: 

E-mail this article to a friend | Printer friendly format

MORE NEWS HEADLINES:
+ Leahy criticizes 'pro-business' Supreme Court - 7/23  
+ Judiciary Committee to probe 'pro-business' Supreme Court rulings - 7/21  
+ Exxon fights interest payments to Exxon Valdez plaintiffs - 7/16  
+ UPDATE: Exxon Valdez plaintiffs seek interest award - 7/12  
+ Age bias ruling could lead to flood of employment lawsuits - 7/12  
+ Starr may defend Arizona's English learner funding - 7/12  
+ AGs celebrate landmark firearms ruling - 6/26  
+ McKenna laments Exxon ruling - 6/25  
+ Legal expert calls Exxon Valdez decision 'limited' - 6/25  
+ Supreme Court slashes Exxon Valdez award - 6/25  


BROWSE BY STATE:
 
BROWSE BY AG:
 
BROWSE BY DATE:
 
LATEST LNL BLOG ENTRIES:
+ Pa. AG candidate: Corbett's sludge stance on side of corporations
+ McDonnell: Virginia laws adapting to new counterfeit products
+ McDonnell: Not the time for new taxes

NEWS | CONTACT LEGALNEWSLINE | ABOUT US | ADVERTISE | RSS © 2008 LegalNewsLine.com. All Rights Reserved.