Legal Opinion
Lennon v. Philip Morris Companies
New York Supreme Court
Decided October 9, 2001PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Charles Edward Ramos, J.
Motion sequences Nos. 003, 004, and 006 are consolidated for purposes of disposition.
In this purported antitrust class action commenced on behalf of smokers, defendants, Philip Morris Companies, Inc., Philip Morris Incorporated (Philip Morris), R.J.R. Nabisco Holdings Corp., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (RJR), B.A.T. Industries, PLC, British American Tobacco Co., Ltd. (BAT), Batus Holdings, Inc., Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., Lorillard Tobacco, Inc., Loews Corporation, Liggett Group, Inc., and Brooke Group, Ltd. (defendants), move to dismiss,…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Leon v. MartinezNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Brooke Group Ltd. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Blue Shield of Va. v. McCreadySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re Relafen Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2004
- Leider v. RalfeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2005
- State v. Daicel Chemical Industries, Ltd.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Fortune Limousine Service, Inc. v. Nextel CommunicationsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006