United States

The plaintiff, the widow of a man who had died of a smoking-related illness, claimed that a defendant tobacco company had misrepresented its "low-tar" and "low-nicotine" cigarettes as a healthier cigarette than regular brands and that her late husband had relied on such statements to his detriment. The plaintiff claimed that her husband had switched to smoking a particular brand of the company's cigarettes based on statements made by the company concerning low-tar and nicotine cigarettes, thinking that it would act as a "stepping stone" to help him quit smoking when, in fact, the company had knowledge that smoking such brands of cigarettes did not actually mitigate health risks to consumers. The company requested the Court to declare that there were no issues worthy of adjudication. The Court denied the motion, finding that there were unresolved issues concerning whether the particular brand at issue offered a safer and healthier cigarette in fact, as well as whether it was reasonable for the plaintiff's late husband to have relied on statements of the defendant company concerning the product when he chose to switch to smoking that particular brand.