California Court of Appeal

In case involving California smokers who were exposed to defendants' marketing and advertising, orders decertifying a class action for claims under the unfair competition law, denying class certification for claims under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and granting summary adjudication of some issues in favor of defendants, are affirmed over claims that the trial court erred in ruling: 1) plaintiffs lack standing to pursue the UCL claim because Proposition 64 applies retroactively and eliminates the ability of individuals who have suffered no injury or monetary loss from pursuing UCL claims; 2) individual issues predominate so this is an inappropriate case for a class action under the UCL or CLRA; and 3) defendants are entitled to summary adjudication on some class-action causes of action.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/05/2006
• Published 09/05/2006

Judges

• McCONNELL, P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Dougherty & Hildre, Donald F. Hildre, William O. Dougherty, Frederick M. Dudek, Thomas D. Haklar, San Diego;  Robinson, Calcagnie & Robinson, Mark P. Robinson, Sharon J. Arkin and Karen Karavatos, Newport Beach, for Plaintiffs and Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, Gregory P. Stone, Daniel P. Collins, Steven B. Weisburd, Joseph S. Klapach, Daniel B. Levin, Los Angeles;  Seltzer CaplanMcMahon Vitek, Gerald L. McMahon and Daniel E. Eaton, San Diego, for Defendant and Respondent Philip Morris USA Inc., Dechert LLP, H. Joseph Escher III, San Francisco;  Wright & L'Estrange, Robert C. Wright, San Diego;  Jones Day and William T. Plesec, for Defendants and Respondents R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Brown & Williamson Holdings, Inc., formerly known as Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation., Loeb & Loeb LLP, and Sharon S. Mequet, Los Angeles, for Defendant and Respondent The Council for Tobacco Research-U.S.A., Inc., DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary U.S. LLP, William S. Boggs and Brian A. Foster, San Diego, for Defendant and Respondent Lorillard Tobacco Company., Reed Smith LLP, and Mary C. Oppedahl, Oakland, for Defendant and Respondent The Tobacco Institute., The Lendrum Law Firm and Jeffrey P. Lendrum, La Jolla, for Defendants and Respondents Liggett Group Inc. and Liggett & Myers, Inc.