Insolia v. Philip Morris, Inc.
United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
186 F.R.D. 547 (1999)
Insolia, Mays, and Lovejoy (plaintiffs), former smokers diagnosed with lung cancer, brought suit against major cigarette manufacturers and tobacco industry trade organizations (defendants), claiming an industry-wide conspiracy to deceive customers about the dangers of smoking. The claims of the plaintiffs were joined pursuant to Rule 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The defendants filed a motion to sever the claims of the plaintiffs because the claims were not sufficiently similar. Specifically, the plaintiffs started to smoke at different ages; the plaintiffs smoked different brands of cigarettes; the plaintiffs quit for different reasons; and there is evidence that Mays contracted cancer due to a work-related accident unrelated to smoking.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Crabb, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 711,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 711,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.