People ex rel. Lockyer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

Defendant R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (Reynolds) appeals a summary judgment favoring plaintiff the People of the State of California on the People’s complaint for enforcement of a master settlement agreement (MSA). Reynolds contends the court erred in concluding Reynolds violated an MSA provision limiting outdoor advertising of tobacco *520 products. Since Reynolds has not demonstrated reversible error, the summary judgment must be upheld.

I

Introduction

We review the summary judgment de novo. (Sambrano v. City of San Diego (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 225, 235 [ 114 Cal.Rptr.2d 151 ].) Further, the “interpretation of a contract is subject to de novo review where the interpretation does not turn on the credibility of extrinsic evidence.” (Morgan v. City of Los Angeles Bd. of Pension Comrs. (2000) 85 Cal.App.4th 836, 843 [ 102 Cal.Rptr.2d 468 ]; Centex Golden Construction Co. v. Dale Tile Co. (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 992, 996 [ 93 Cal.Rptr.2d 259 ].) 1

Tobacco product manufacturer Reynolds promoted its tobacco products in California. 2 As part of Reynolds’s promotion of its Winston brand of cigarettes, Reynolds sponsored the NASCAR 3 Winston Cup Series, a series of races…