A far-reaching ruling is expected in a case that could apply limits in 2004's Proposition 64 to ads for cigarettes.
Jump to full article: Los Angeles Times, 2009-05-17
Author: Maura Dolan
Intro: Reporting from San Francisco -- Consumer class-action lawsuits in California, which have encountered mounting skepticism from courts, face a major test in a tobacco case to be decided Monday by the state Supreme Court.
The court will determine whether smokers who say they purchased cigarettes in response to deceptive ads can collectively sue the industry for the money they spent to smoke.
The court has grappled with the case for more than two years, trying to determine the reach of Proposition 64, a 2004 initiative intended to stop bogus lawsuits aimed at extorting money from small business. During the last several years, lower courts have tossed out many consumer class actions and scrutinized settlements more closely.
"Judges have started . . . wondering why there was a million dollars in attorneys fees and virtually nothing for the people who were supposedly defrauded," said Trent Norris, a San Francisco lawyer who defends corporations. "California is part of a national trend." . . .
Proposition 64 amended the state's Unfair Competition Law to limit suits to people who have lost money or property. . . .
The tobacco case will determine whether class actions can be filed under the Unfair Competition Law. At issue is whether all members of the class must prove that the advertisements prompted them to buy cigarettes, a requirement that some attorneys said would doom the case.
The suit was brought on behalf of every Californian who was exposed to tobacco ads and bought cigarettes from 1998 to 2007. A similar suit in Michigan obtained a $10-billion jury award, Arkin said.
Jump to full article » |