Legal Opinion
Pearson v. Philip Morris, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided June 19, 2013No. 021111819; A137297PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.
Plaintiffs, who purchased Marlboro Lights cigarettes manufactured by defendant,1 brought this action against defendant under the Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act (UTPA), ORS 646.605 to 646.652. Plaintiffs alleged that defendant had violated the UTPA by misrepresenting the characteristics of Marlboro Lights and that, as a result of defendant’s misrepresentations, they had suffered economic losses.
Plaintiffs filed a motion asking the trial court to certify the action as a class action, with a class consisting of the approximately 100,000 people who had purchased Marlboro Lights in Oregon…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Ball v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1968
- Altria Group, Inc. v. GoodSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- In Re Visa Check/mastermoney Antitrust Litigation. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Limited, Inc., Sears Roebuck & Company, Safeway Inc., Circuit City Stores, Inc., National Retail Federation and the Food Marketing Institute, International Mass Retail Association, and All Similarly Situated Persons v. Visa U.S.A. Inc. And Mastercard International IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Waste Management Holdings, Inc. v. MowbrayCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2000
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- In re Conagra Foods, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2015
- Pearson v. Philip Morris, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2015
- Delgado v. Del Monte Fresh Produce, N.A., Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
- Avenue Lofts Condominiums Owners' Ass'n v. Victaulic Co.District Court, D. Oregon · 2014
- Aspinall v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.Massachusetts Superior Court · 2015
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.