TOBACCO CONTROL LAWS

State of Minnesota v. Philip Morris Inc.

A state government and a health insurer brought an action against five tobacco companies and two trade associations under various theories of law, claiming that the defendants had suppressed information about the negative health effects of tobacco use and had manipulated the nicotine content of cigarettes to stimulate addiction.  On appeal, the Court considered whether the health insurer possessed standing to bring the claims asserted by the plaintiffs.  Because the insurer was not harmed directly by a breach of an assumed duty to protect public health, the Court found that the insurer lacked standing to bring tortious claims based on this duty.  The Court further held that the insurer possessed standing to bring claims of consumer protection and antitrust violations pursuant to statutory language providing for redress of indirect harms.  Finally, the Court held that the insurer possessed associational standing to pursue equitable claims requesting injunctive relief.

State of Minnesota, et al. v. Philip Morris Incorporated, et al., 551 N.W.2d 490, Supreme Court of Minnesota (1996).

  • United States
  • Jul 25, 1996
  • Supreme Court of Minnesota
Download Document

Parties

Plaintiff

  • Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota
  • State of Minnesota, by Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Attorney General

Defendant

  • B.A.T. Industries, p.l.c.
  • Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation
  • Liggett Group, Inc.
  • Lorillard Tobacco Company
  • Philip Morris Incorporated
  • R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company
  • THE AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY
  • The Council for Tobacco Research-U.S.A., Inc.
  • The Tobacco Institute, Inc.

Legislation Cited

Related Documents

None

Type of Litigation

Health Care Cost Recovery
Governments or insurance agencies may seek reimbursement from the tobacco companies for health care costs related to tobacco. The most famous example is the case brought by individual states in the U.S.A. that resulted in the Master Settlement Agreement.

Tobacco Control Topics

Contents and Disclosures Measures
Measures for testing, measuring, regulating, or disclosing the contents and emissions of tobacco products. (See FCTC Arts. 9 and 10)
Advertising, Promotion and Sponsorship
Measures restricting any form of direct or indirect tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship. (See FCTC Art. 13)

Substantive Issues

Consumer Protection Violation

Any violation of a law designed to ensure fair trade, competition, or the free flow of truthful information in the marketplace. For example, a government may require businesses to disclose detailed information about products—particularly in areas where safety or public health is an issue.

Industry-Perpetrated Fraud
The tobacco industry may have perpetrated a fraud upon the public or the courts by presenting false information or deliberately hiding known-facts.
Procedural Defect
The court might consider procedural matters without touching the merits of the case. These might include: improper joinder, when third parties, such as Health NGOs or government officials, seek to become parties to the suit; lack of standing, where a plaintiff fails to meet the minimum requirements to bring suit; lack of personal jurisdiction, where the court does not have jurisdiction to rule over the defendant; or lack of subject matter jurisdiction, where the court does not have jurisdiction over the issue at suit.

Type of Tobacco Product

None

View Limitations
1400 I Street N.W.,
Suite 1200,
Washington, DC 20005
United States of America

Phone: (202) 296-5469

Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids is a BBB-accredited charity and a
Guidestar Exchange Gold Participant.

© 2025 Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids | Trademarks | Copyright | Privacy

Site created and maintained by