Philip Morris Cos. Inc. v. Miner
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the CourtRhonda K. Wood, Associate Justice
I,Class certification is proper if six, rule-based prerequisites are satisfied. Two of those prerequisites are at issue in this case: predominance and superiority. Another issue is whether the elass is ascertainable. Here, the class plaintiffs alleged that Philip Morris deceived them by advertising Marlboro Lights as being safer and having less tar and nicotine than other cigarettes. The circuit court certified the plaintiffs’ class action against Philip Morris based on the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act; Philip Morris appeals the class certification. Because common issues…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- McLaughlin v. American Tobacco Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
- Aspinall v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2004
- Williamson v. Sanofi Winthrop Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
- Fraley v. Williams Ford Tractor & Equipment Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
- Mega Life and Health Ins. Co. v. JacolaSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Dennis Speerly v. General Motors, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2025
- Arkansas Department of Veterans Affairs v. OkekeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2015
- GGNSC Arkadelphia, LLC v. LambSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2015
- In re Dial Complete Marketing & Sales Practices LitigationDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2015
- Robinson Nursing & Rehabilitation Center, LLC v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2017
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.