Search for: "Lorillard Tobacco" Results 141 - 160 of 177
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Apr 2008, 4:53 am
Reynolds Tobacco Co., Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., Lorillard Tobacco Co., Ligget Group, American Tobacco Co., Altria Group, and British American Tobacco; the underlying class action complaint alleged the tobacco companies duped smokers into believing that “light” cigarettes were less harmful to them. [read post]
16 Oct 2014, 5:30 am by Jane Bambauer
Notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s findings in Lorillard, empirical evidence is mixed on whether tobacco advertising mostly affects market share among brands or if it raises overall demand for tobacco products. [read post]
5 Apr 2018, 4:15 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Plaintiffs failed to state a cause of action for fraud, as they never alleged that they paid the allegedly fraudulent bills and suffered injury as a result (see Small v Lorillard Tobacco Co., 94 NY2d 43, 57 [1999]). [read post]
29 Aug 2012, 9:29 am by James Hamilton
Chairman Issa asked the SEC Chair to reconcile the quiet period rules with the Supreme Court’s decision in Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. [read post]
4 Aug 2019, 10:03 pm by Chris Castle
 These fixes sound in our experience in regulating the tobacco industry, or “Big Tobacco. [read post]
4 Feb 2009, 5:24 am
., "Lorillard"), and then, on the basis of some sampling, they recognized that they needed a more elaborate search process to get useful results. [read post]
17 Aug 2016, 9:21 am by Jennifer R. Scullion
Lorillard Tobacco Co., Inc., 94 N.Y.2d 43, 56 (1999) (consumers who buy a product that they would not have purchased absent deceptive conduct, without more, have not suffered injury)). [read post]
10 Oct 2016, 1:14 pm
"[W]hile the statute does not require proof of justifiable reliance, a plaintiff seeking compensatory damages must show that the defendant engaged in a material deceptive act or practice that caused actual, although not necessarily pecuniary, harm" (Oswego Laborers' Local 214 Pension Fund, 85 NY2d at 26; see generally Small v Lorillard Tobacco Co., 94 NY2d 43, 55-56). [read post]
21 Jun 2010, 9:36 am by Eugene Volokh
The tendency of speech to send bad messages to children is not seen as a secondary effect, and neither is its tendency to cause harms that flow from such messages — for instance, tobacco use, Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. [read post]
10 Nov 2014, 3:42 am by Peter Mahler
” For the meaning of the operative term, misappropriation, the court turned to the dictionary, quoting from Lorillard Tobacco Co. v American Legacy Foundation, 903 A2d 728, 738 [Del 2006], for the proposition that “‘[u]nder well-settled case law, Delaware courts look to dictionaries for assistance in determining the plain meaning of terms which are not defined in a contract. [read post]
10 Dec 2009, 7:37 pm
"); see also Lorillard, 903 A.2d at 740 ("When a term's definition is not altered or has no gloss in the [relevant] industry it should be construed in accordance with its ordinary dictionary meaning. [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 12:41 pm by Erin Miller
Philip Morris USA (09-994); Lorillard Tobacco v. [read post]