In re TOBACCO II CASES
After passage of Proposition 64--which requires private plaintiffs in suit under state's unfair competition law to have suffered injury in fact and lost money or property as a result of such unfair competition--to establish standing in UCL class action against cigarette makers, individual plaintiffs and all class members were required to show injury in fact consisting of lost money or property caused by the unfair competition. The requirement of individual reliance meant the individual issues predominate over the common issues, thus making the case unsuitable for a class action. Where class had been certified before passage of Proposition 64, trial court correctly decertified class after it passed since Proposition 64's new standing requirements apply to pending cases.
Comments on In re TOBACCO II CASES