By Timothy S. Donahue
Top Takeaways:
Legal shift: Massachusetts appeals court ruled 93A claims don’t require proving fraud, making it easier for plaintiffs.
Case revived: The decision reopens a wrongful death lawsuit against Philip Morris USA.
Broader impact: The ruling enhances consumer protection claims as a legal strategy against tobacco companies.
A Massachusetts appeals court has reinstated a wrongful death lawsuit against Philip Morris USA, ruling that claims made under the state’s strong consumer protection law do not need proof of traditional fraud.
The case focuses on Chapter 93A, Massachusetts’s consumer protection law, which bans “unfair or deceptive acts or practices” in trade or commerce. The court explained that plaintiffs don’t need to meet the higher legal standard for fraud claims—such as proving intent to deceive—in order to pursue a claim under 93A.
That distinction matters.
By lowering the evidentiary standard, the ruling enables plaintiffs to pursue claims based on whether conduct was unfair or misleading to consumers, rather than whether it met the stricter definition of fraud.
The case, which was previously dismissed, will now proceed, giving the plaintiff another chance to argue that the company’s conduct violated 93A standards.
The statute poses significant financial risks for defendants. If a violation is determined to be knowing or willful, courts can award double or triple damages along with attorneys’ fees—making 93A one of the most powerful state-level legal tools in the U.S.
For the tobacco and nicotine industry, the decision emphasizes a growing legal trend: plaintiffs are increasingly turning to consumer protection laws instead of traditional product liability or fraud claims.
The appeals court’s interpretation effectively expands the options for lawsuits related to marketing, disclosure, and consumer perception—areas already closely watched by regulators.
While the ruling specifically applies to Massachusetts law, its implications could reach further, especially since similar statutes exist in other states and are often used in parallel litigation strategies.
