Lexis Legal News : Mealey's Tobacco : Lawsuit Filings, Litigation, Settlements, Verdicts and Court News

Mealey's Tobacco

June 08, 2020
Jurisdiction Ruling Against Tribal Cigarette Company Correct, California Argues

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A California appeals court correctly held that the state has jurisdiction to regulate the sale of cigarettes by an Indian tobacco company in California, so review of the dispute by the U.S. Supreme Court is not needed, the state tells the high court in a June 5 response brief filed at the request of the court (Native Wholesale Supply Company v. People of California ex rel. Xavier Becerra, No. 19-985, U.S. Sup.).
June 05, 2020
Panel: Judge Right To Exclude Asbestos Claim From Smoker’s Widow’s Lawsuit

MIAMI — A Florida appellate panel on June 3 found that a trial court properly excluded a past asbestos claim from the trial of a smoker’s widow who was awarded $2.4 million in damages and rejected challenges to the lower court’s denial of a motion for directed verdict and jury instructions regarding the reliance element of an Engle progeny fraud claim while certifying conflict with two recent appellate decisions on the issue (Philip Morris United States v. Brenda Chadwell, No. 3D19-239, Fla. App., 3rd Dist., 2020 Fla. App. LEXIS 7653).
June 04, 2020
Michigan Appellate Panel Affirms Injunction Blocking Emergency Flavored Vape Ban

LANSING, Mich. — A Michigan appellate panel on May 21 affirmed a lower court’s preliminary injunction halting enforcement of an emergency statewide ban on sales of flavored vape products after agreeing with the lower court that vape businesses challenging the law would suffer irreparable harm if it were enforced and that the state would not be harmed by following public notice and hearing procedures before issuing new vaping regulations (Slis, et al. v. Michigan, et al., No. 351211, A Clean Cigarette Corporation v. Michigan, et al., No. 351212, Mich. App., 2020 Mich. App. LEXIS 3506).
June 04, 2020
Washington Law Preempts Local Regulations On Sampling In Vape Shops, Panel Finds

TACOMA, Wash. — A Washington appellate panel on June 2 affirmed an injunction that blocked a county from imposing limits on vape shops offering e-liquid samples and tastings to customers and requiring the shops to install ventilation systems, finding that the county’s regulations were preempted by the state law governing the vaping industry (Anti-Smoking Alliance v. Tacoma-Pierce County Department of Health, et al., No. 52458-9, Wash. App., Div. 2, 2020 Wash. App. LEXIS 1529).
June 04, 2020
Juul MDL Judge Approves 2-Tiered Common Benefit Fund For Plaintiffs’ Counsel

SAN FRANCISCO — The judge overseeing the Juul Labs Inc. multidistrict litigation on May 27 ordered the establishment of a two-tiered common benefit fee and expense fund in which plaintiffs’ counsel who agree to participate early will pay a 7 percent assessment on future judgments and those who agree to participate later will pay 10 percent (In Re: Juul Labs, Inc., Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2913, No. 19-md-2913, N.D. Calif.).
June 01, 2020
Antitrust Allegations Will Remain Outside Juul MDL For Now, Judge Rules

SAN FRANCISCO — The judge overseeing the Juul multidistrict litigation on May 26 denied a motion by the plaintiffs to amend their class complaint against e-cigarette maker Juul Labs Inc. and tobacco manufacturer Altria Group Inc. to include antitrust causes of action and ruled that pending antitrust class actions against Juul and Altria are not member cases of the MDL but may be related to the MDL for purposes of discovery (In Re: Juul Labs, Inc., Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2913, No. 19-md-2913, N.D. Calif.).
May 22, 2020
Juul MDL Judge Orders Coordination With California’s Consolidated Juul Litigation

SAN FRANCISCO — The judge overseeing the multidistrict litigation against e-cigarette maker Juul Labs Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on May 20 issued a joint order coordinating proceedings and discovery with California’s Judicial Council Coordinated Proceeding (JCCP) against Juul in the Los Angeles County Superior Court (In Re: Juul Labs, Inc., Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2913, No. 19-md-2913, N.D. Calif.).
May 18, 2020
Vape Companies Tell D.C. Circuit FDA Deeming Rule Is Unconstitutional

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A group of vape shops and manufacturers in an April 29 appellant brief urges the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to reverse a district court’s grant of summary judgment to the government on claims that the Food and Drug Administration’s 2016 deeming rule regulating e-cigarettes violates the appointments clause of the U.S. Constitution because it was not issued by a properly appointed official and violates the First Amendment by restricting commercial speech (Moose Jooce, et al. v. Food and Drug Administration, et al., No. 20-5048, D.C. Cir.).
May 18, 2020
Juul MDL Judge Announces Intent To Appoint Settlement Master

SAN FRANCISCO — The judge overseeing the Juul Labs Inc. multidistrict litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on May 4 announced his intent to appoint a settlement master to facilitate discussions between the parties (In Re: Juul Labs, Inc., Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2913, No. 19-md-2913, N.D. Calif.).
May 15, 2020
On Remand, Judge Again Denies Issue Preclusion In Smoker’s Wrongful Death Suit

BRIDGEPORT, Conn. — A federal judge in Connecticut readdressing a smoker’s widower’s motion to preclude findings regarding the tobacco industry’s manipulation of nicotine levels and cigarettes from his wrongful death lawsuit after remand by the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 12 found that the motion did not pass the “fairness” test for issue preclusion (Vincent J. Bifolck v. Philip Morris USA Inc., No. 06-1768, D. Conn., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83298).
May 14, 2020
Judge Delays FDA’s Tobacco Product Graphic Warnings Deadline Due To Coronavirus

TYLER, Texas — A federal judge in Texas on May 8 granted a joint motion filed by government agencies and tobacco merchants to extend deadlines for enforcement of the Food and Drug Administration’s new tobacco graphic warnings rule by six months due to logistical delays caused by the novel coronavirus pandemic (R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al. v. FDA, et al., No. 20-176, E.D. Texas).
May 12, 2020
Philip Morris Sues To Vacate Or Delay FDA’s Tobacco Products Graphic Warnings Rule

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Philip Morris USA Inc. and a New Jersey-based cigarette company on May 6 filed a complaint in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenging the Food and Drug Administration’s latest rule requiring graphic warnings on tobacco packages and advertisements as unconstitutional and asking the court to vacate the rule and permanently enjoin enforcement of the statutory provision under which it was issued or, in the alternative, to delay its implementation (Philip Morris USA Inc., et al., v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, et al., No. 20-1181, D. D.C.).
May 12, 2020
Florida Panel Reverses Directed Verdict, Affirms Smoker’s Membership In Engle Class

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A Florida appellate panel on May 6 reversed a trial court’s directed verdict for three tobacco companies on strict liability and negligence claims brought by the estate of a deceased smoker, holding that testimony regarding the decedent’s use of the companies’ products established individual causation and remanding to reinstate the jury’s original $1.8 million verdict, which included $205,000 in punitive damages (Philip Morris USA Inc., et al. v. James Santoro, No. 4D18-1730, Fla. App., 4th Dist., 2020 Fla. App. LEXIS 6236.)
May 11, 2020
FDA Seeks Delay Of Graphic Warnings Requirement Deadline Due To Coronavirus Pandemic

TYLER, Texas — A group of tobacco merchants and government agencies on May 6 filed a joint motion asking a federal court in Texas to extend deadlines for enforcement of the Food and Drug Administration’s new tobacco products graphic warnings rule by six months due to logistical delays caused by the novel coronavirus pandemic (R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al. v. FDA, et al., No. 20-176, E.D Texas).
May 07, 2020
California Vaping Group Says Los Angeles’ Flavored Vapes Ban Is Unconstitutional

LOS ANGELES — A California vaping trade association and vape shop on May 4 filed a complaint against Los Angeles County and its board of supervisors in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, seeking to enjoin the county from enforcing a recently enacted ordinance banning all flavored tobacco products that they assert will destroy the vaping industry in the county (CA Smoke & Vape Association, Inc., et al. v. Los Angeles, et al., No. 20-4065, C.D. Calif.).
May 07, 2020
4th Circuit Dismisses Vaping Groups’ Appeal Of Tobacco Products Deadline As Moot

RICHMOND, Va. — A Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on May 4 dismissed as moot an appeal by e-cigarette industry groups of a 2019 ruling setting premarket tobacco application (PMTA) deadlines as it was superseded by subsequent Food and Drug Administration guidance and affirmed the district court’s denial of cigar industry associations’ motion to intervene as time-barred (In re: Cigar Association Of America, et al., No. 19-2130, 4th Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 14205).
May 06, 2020
Juul MDL Plaintiffs Ask Court To Set Up Common Benefit Fee And Expense Fund

SAN FRANCISCO — The Plaintiffs Steering Committee (PSC) in the Juul Labs Inc. multidistrict litigation on May 2 asked the court to establish a two-tiered common benefit fee and expense fund in which plaintiffs’ counsel who agree to participate early pay a 7 percent assessment on future judgments and those who agree to participate later pay 10 percent (In Re: Juul Labs, Inc., Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2913, No. 19-md-2913, N.D. Calif.).
April 28, 2020
Juul, Altria Oppose MDL Plaintiffs Amending Complaint To Include Antitrust Claims

SAN FRANCISCO — E-cigarette maker Juul Labs Inc. (JLI) and tobacco manufacturer Altria Group Inc. on April 24 opposed amending the master class action complaint against them to include claims that they violated federal antitrust and anti-competition laws, writing that it would “impermissibly” expand the scope of the pending multidistrict litigation against them (In Re: Juul Labs, Inc., Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2913, No. 19-md-2913, N.D. Calif.).
April 28, 2020
Smoker’s Daughter Urges High Court To Review Reversal Of $6.4M Verdict

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A smoker’s daughter tells the Florida Supreme Court in an April 23 brief that it should exercise jurisdiction to review a divided appellate panel’s reversal of a $6.4 million verdict because the panel’s holding that a plaintiff must show reliance on a specific statement to prevail on a fraudulent concealment claim conflicts with other appellate courts’ holdings (Linda Prentice, as Personal Representative of the Estate of John C. Price, v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, No. SC20-291, Fla. Sup.).
April 27, 2020
Juul Opposes Finding 2 Antitrust Class Action Complaints Related To MDL

SAN FRANCISCO — E-cigarette maker Juul Labs Inc. (JLI) on April 20 told the Juul multidistrict litigation court that it should find that two antitrust class actions against it and tobacco company Altria Group Inc. are not related to the MDL because there is no “substantial overlap” among the cases (In Re: Juul Labs, Inc., Marketing, Sales Practices, And Products Liability Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2913, No. 19-md-2913, N.D. Calif.).