Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
New York�A New York appeals court last week reinstated a $1.3 billion fee award for attorneys who helped to settle tobacco litigation in California, saying the arbitrators who awarded the fee did not exceed their authority and should not have been second-guessed by a state judge. In October 2002, Nicholas Figueroa, a New York City trial judge, said the fee award was improperly based on work the attorneys had done in nationwide tobacco litigation, rather than just the litigation to settle claims on behalf of the state of California. However, a unanimous panel of New York state’s intermediate-level Appellate Division found that Figueroa had “improperly interjected” himself into a dispute over the merits of the award. “It is beyond cavil that the scope of judicial review of an arbitration proceeding is extremely limited,” the court wrote in an unsigned opinion, In re Application of Brown & Williamson, No. 1284N. Going a step further, the court said “Although our finding that the arbitrators did not exceed their power is dispositive of the issue on appeal, we nevertheless observe that the award is neither irrational nor violative of public policy.” The $1.3 billion fee award, given to a 56-firm consortium known as the Castano Group, was the largest under the 1998 nationwide tobacco settlement that required tobacco companies to pay $206 billion to 46 states. It was the only fee award challenged by the tobacco industry. The Castano Group, taking on the role of a private attorney general under California law, sued the tobacco industry and helped to win $25 billion for the state. The group began suing tobacco companies in 1994 in Louisiana and has sued the industry in 25 states. The $1.3 billion fee was awarded by a panel of three arbitrators in New York, under a procedure established by the 1998 settlement. Because the fee was decided in New York, challenges to it have been heard by New York courts. The tobacco companies, led by Brown & Williamson, challenged the ruling, and Figueroa agreed that the arbitrators had exceeded their authority by granting the fee.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.