PHAI Online - The Public Health Advocacy Institute

 

 

 

Posts Tagged ‘doj’

The Weakening of RICO’s Remedies Provision: Analysis of the Appeals Court’s Decision in USA v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al.

Tuesday, January 22nd, 2008

This white paper analyzes the equitable remedies provision of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) as it was interpreted by both the trial and appeals courts in the Department of Justice’s civil RICO case against the major United States cigarette manufacturers. It demonstrates how the appeals court’s decision, which bound the trial court, severely affected the remedies that could be ordered in that case — despite the judge’s conclusion that the defendants are racketeers. It argues that RICO’s equitable remedies provision needs to be clarified and strengthened so that it can be used most effectively to promote public health.

The Weakening of RICO’s Remedies Provision: Analysis of the Appeals Court’s Decision in USA v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al.



Potential Master Settlement Agreement Violations Evidenced in Judge Kessler’s Findings in USA v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al.

Thursday, January 17th, 2008

This practice guide examines the court’s lengthy 2006 decision in the U.S. Department of Justice’s racketeering suit against the major American cigarette manufacturers.  It highlights the numerous actions of these manufacturers cited in that opinion that may constitute violations of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement, and it calls for enforcement actions to remedy such violations.

Potential Master Settlement Agreement Violations Evidenced in Judge Kessler’s Findings in USA v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al.



A Guide for Plaintiffs’ Attorneys: Using Findings and Resources from USA v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al. in Future Claims Against Big Tobacco

Thursday, January 17th, 2008

PHAI has published this practice guide to help plaintiffs’ attorneys understand the some of the value of the judge’s decision in the U.S. Department of Justice’s racketeering suit against the major American cigarette manufacturers for private practice. It highlights the ways in which attorneys may use this opinion in their future claims against “big tobacco” while pointing out areas in which its use may be problematic. It also provides a helpful list of online resources related to the case.

A Guide for Plaintiffs’ Attorneys: Using Findings and Resources from USA v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al. in Future Claims Against Big Tobacco



PHAI Submits Brief on Behalf of AMA and others to U.S. Court of Appeals for DC Circuit in Tobacco Racketeering Appeal

Tuesday, December 4th, 2007

PHAI Amicus Brief on Behalf ot the AMA and others in Appeal of RICO case: Last year, a federal judge found the tobacco industry liable for violating RICO, the federal anti-racketeering statute, in a case filed against the industry by the United States Government. An appeal is pending in the U.S Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.PHAI, on behalf of itself, the American Medical Association, the American College of Physicians, the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons, the American Thoracic Society, Society for Thoracic Surgeons, and Mississippi State Medical Association filed an amicus brief arguing that tobacco companies continue to misinform and deny responsibility for the harm their products cause. Therefore, two remedies proposed at trial but not adopted by the trial court should be implemented: 1) an education and counter-marketing program; and 2) youth smoking reduction targets. By setting up a program to correct misinformation and penalties for the industry if it fails to reduce youth smoking, the opportunities for further violations of the RICO statute by the tobacco industry will be reduced.




Copyright 2003-2014 Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHAI) at
Northeastern University School of Law