We have previously reported on the 540-page district court opinion certifying a class action against Philip Morris USA alleging fraud under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) arising out of the advertising and sale of “light cigarettes.” See Schwab v. Phillip Morris USA, Inc., 449 F.Supp.2d 992 (E.D.N.Y. 2006). That articule may be found here. The Second Circuit today reversed that district court opinion because “under RICO, each plaintiff must prove reliance, injury, and damages.” Slip Opn., at 4. The Circuit Court held that the requirements for class action certification under Rule 23(b)(3) could not be met because individual questions predominate. Id., at 9.
We will post an article on the Second Circuit opinion tomorrow morning, but the interested reader may find the circuit court opinion below.
Download PDF file of McLaughlin v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.
Comments are closed.