Curtis v. Altria Group, Inc.
2010 WL 5292065
Minn. Ct. App. U2010Background
- Appellants sued Altria Group Inc. (Atria) and Philip Morris Inc. under Minn. Stat. § 8.31, subd. 3a, seeking damages and other relief for false advertising, consumer fraud, and deceptive trade practices regarding Marlboro Lights; also asserted common-law fraud and unjust enrichment.
- Class defined as all Minnesota purchasers of Marlboro Lights for personal use from 1972 to class certification.
- District court denied then certified the class; granted partial summary judgment on public-benefit and release issues; dismissed unjust enrichment on pleadings; appealed.
- Tobacco Settlement (1998) between the state and tobacco defendants influenced public-benefit and release analyses; later federal action (Monograph 13) questioned low-tar cigarette health benefits.
- Altria’s alter-ego/parent control over Philip Morris was contested; district court found vicarious jurisdiction, which the court now rejects; key internal documents and public-health context informed the public-benefit analysis.
- The court reverses the jurisdiction ruling as to Altria, reinstates 8.31, subd. 3a claims (not barred by Tobacco Settlement), but affirms the unjust-enrichment dismissal and denies collateral estoppel relief; class certification is affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personal jurisdiction over Altria | Altria acts as alter ego; controls Philip Morris in Minnesota | Altria is separate from Philip Morris; no Minnesota contact | Altria not subject; reverse; only Philip Morris remains in case |
| Public-benefit requirement for 8.31, subd. 3a | Claims involve public interest; meet Ly v. Nystrom Collins standard | Public benefit not shown due to prior AG action and settlement | Public benefit satisfied; reverse dismissal |
| Effect of Tobacco Settlement on 8.31, subd. 3a | Settlement does not bar private action; not representative of state | Private actions barred as state action or by release | Settlement release does not bar; private action allowed; remand on 3a claims |
| Collateral estoppel | DOJ findings bind Philip Morris and preclude claims | Discretionary; not identical actions; jury vs bench trial | District court did not abuse discretion; collateral estoppel not applied |
| Class certification | Common questions predominate; damages can be class-wide via causal nexus | Individual issues predominate; lack of common causation proof | Class certification preserved; common issues predominate; district court did not abuse discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Ly v. Nystrom, 615 N.W.2d 302 (Minn. 2000) (limits private 8.31 action to public-benefit claims)
- Collins v. Minn. Sch. of Bus., 655 N.W.2d 320 (Minn. 2003) (public-benefit requirement satisfied when public misrepresentation to many)
- Group Health Plan, Inc. v. Philip Morris, Inc., 621 N.W.2d 2 (Minn. 2001) (causal nexus in consumer-protection class actions may be proven by common proof)
- Weigand v. Walser Auto. Grps., Inc., 683 N.W.2d 807 (Minn. 2004) (prior settlement effects on private actions; not controlling here)
- Peterson v. BASF Corp., 675 N.W.2d 57 (Minn. 2004) (class-wide causation via advertising impact; reliance not required)
- Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 439 U.S. 322 (U.S. 1979) (non-mutual collateral estoppel considerations; jury vs bench trial)
- International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (U.S. 1945) (foundation for minimum contacts in due process analysis)