About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (December 3, 2019)

handle is hein.crs/govbivv0001 and id is 1 raw text is: r~~w Con arers Reflsearch Service_ - Tobacco, Opioids, and Global Settlements: Considerations for Congress December 3, 2019 A recent Sidebar provided an overview of the sprawling state and local government opioid litigation pending in state and federal courts and highlighted a number of global settlement proposals that would settle claims across both litigation tracks against certain defendants. Commentators have often compared the opioid litigation and the prospect of a global settlement of the state and local government opioid cases to the tobacco litigation in the 1990s and the resulting 1998 Master Settlement Agreement (MSA). The 1998 MSA between 46 state attorneys generals and four of the nation's largest tobacco manufacturers remains the largest civil litigation settlement in U.S. history, requiring the tobacco manufacturers to pay approximately $206 billion over the first 25 years of the agreement and to agree to certain practice changes. The nature and magnitude of the MSA also prompted congressional involvement in its negotiation and implementation. In light of the comparison commentators have drawn between the opioid and tobacco litigation and the ongoing global settlement discussions in the opioid context, this Sidebar provides an overview of the tobacco litigation in the 1990s and the negotiation and implementation of the MSA, and discusses some considerations for Congress as it continues to analyze the opioid litigation and consider ways to address the epidemic. Tobacco Litigation and the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) Starting around the mid- 1990s, state attorneys general began filing lawsuits in their respective state courts against the major tobacco manufacturers to seek reimbursement for healthcare expenditures those states made to treat their citizens' tobacco-related illnesses. Though the complaints' specifics varied, the suits generally shared a common case theory. They tended to allege that the major tobacco companies misled and deceived the public by suppressing internal research about cigarettes' risks and addictive properties and also conspired to suppress the development of and marketing of safer cigarettes. In doing so, the complaints asserted that the companies engaged in fraud, racketeering activities, or conduct that violated antitrust laws. Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov LSB10379 CRS Leg Sidebar Prepamd for Membe-q and Cornm ittees o4 Co nq g ess --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most