Chamberlain v. American Tobacco Company, et al.

The plaintiffs, a class of smokers, filed an action against the defendants, tobacco companies, for breach of warranty, unfair, deceptive or fraudulent business practices, unfair competition and false advertising and unconscionable acts and practices in violation of Ohio's Consumer Protection Statutes and breach of implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for ordinary use. The plaintiffs claimed harms to health created by addictive effects of nicotine and defendants' actions since the 1950s to undermine and distort information on smoking and health that was shared with the public. The defendants successfully removed the case to federal court, and now, plaintiffs moved to remand case to state court. Because the plaintiffs did not have "an arguably reasonable basis" for recovery from defendants, the Court denied the plaintiff's motion to remand.


Chamberlain v. American Tobacco Co., et al., 70 F.Supp.2d 788, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division (1999).

  • United States
  • Apr 12, 1999
  • United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division


Plaintiff Judith E. Chamberlain


  • American Brands, Inc.
  • American Tobacco Company, Inc.
  • B.A.T. Industries P.L.C.
  • BATUS Holdings, Inc.
  • British American Tobacco Co., Ltd.
  • Brooke Group, Ltd.
  • Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.
  • Eby-Brown Company
  • Liggett & Myers, Inc.
  • Liggett Group, Inc.
  • Loews Corp.
  • Lorillard Tobacco Co.
  • Lorillard, Inc.
  • Novelart Manufacturing Company
  • Phillip Morris Companies, Inc.
  • Phillip Morris, Inc.
  • R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company
  • Rini Rego Supermarket, Inc.
  • Riser Foods Inc.
  • RJR Nabisco, Inc.
  • Tobacco Institute, Inc.
  • United States Tobacco Co.
  • UST, Inc.

Legislation Cited

Related Documents

Type of Litigation

Tobacco Control Topics

Substantive Issues

Type of Tobacco Product