In Re Tobacco Cases II

Bad Law
2007 Cal. LEXIS 8189·41 Cal. 4th 1257·63 Cal. Rptr. 3d 418·163 P.3d 106
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 2, 2007S129522California6,137 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kennard, J.

In Mangini v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1057 [ 31 Cal.Rptr.2d 358 , 875 P.2d 73 ] (Mangini), this court held that the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (FCLAA) ( 15 U.S.C. § 1331 et seq.), which regulates tobacco advertising, did not preempt a claim against tobacco companies under the state unfair competition law (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.) for advertising cigarettes in a manner that encouraged minors to begin smoking. The main issue presented here is whether, as the Court of Appeal concluded, the United States Supreme Court’s later decision in Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly (2001) 533 U.S. 525 [ 150 L.Ed.2d 532 , 121 S.Ct. 2404 ] (Lorillard) is inconsistent with, and thus impliedly disapproved, Mangini . We agree with the Court of Appeal, and we are bound to accept the high court’s decision in Lorillard as controlling authority. Accordingly, we will affirm the Court of Appeal’s judgment.

I

In 1994, four years before this action was filed, the Attorney General of California joined with the attorneys general of the other 49 states in bringing an action against six tobacco companies, including Phillip Morris Incorporated (Phillip…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.