Forces Action Project, LLC v. California
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Plaintiffs, a class of “consumers of tobacco products,” allege that the states of California and Utah, the city of San Francisco, and several tobacco companies (collectively, Defendants) violated their rights to equal protection and due process when Defendants entered into the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA). The district court dismissed the action, holding that Plaintiffs do not have standing. The court also denied Plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint. We affirm in part and reverse in part. Standing
Plaintiffs argue that the M.S.A. § is a taking of their property without due process, because it requires the tobacco companies to “pass through” their monetary penalties in the form of higher prices for their consumer products. Plaintiffs lack standing to bring this claim because they have not alleged an injury in fact. Table Bluff Reservation v. Philip Morris, Inc., 256 F.3d 879, 885-886 (9th Cir.2001) (dismissing a similar claim because the argument that a party must “pay increased tobacco prices does not allege an injury in fact”).
Next, Plaintiffs contend that the M.S.A. § insulates the tobacco companies from claims that Plaintiffs otherwise could bring.…