| Contingencies | Contingencies Legal proceedings covering a wide range of matters are pending or threatened in various United States and foreign jurisdictions against Altria and certain of our subsidiaries, including PM USA and USSTC, as well as our indemnitees and investees. Various types of claims may be raised in these proceedings, including product liability, unfair trade practices, antitrust, income tax liability, contraband shipments, patent infringement, employment matters, claims alleging violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), claims for contribution and claims of competitors, shareholders or distributors. Legislative action, such as changes to tort law, also may expand the types of claims and remedies available to plaintiffs. Litigation is subject to uncertainty and it is possible that there could be adverse developments in pending or future cases. An unfavorable outcome or settlement of pending tobacco-related or other litigation could encourage the commencement of additional litigation. Damages claimed in some tobacco-related and other litigation are or can be significant and, in certain cases, have ranged in the billions of dollars. The variability in pleadings in multiple jurisdictions, together with the actual experience of management in litigating claims, demonstrate that the monetary relief that may be specified in a lawsuit bears little relevance to the ultimate outcome. In certain cases, plaintiffs claim that defendants’ liability is joint and several. In such cases, we may face the risk that one or more co-defendants decline or otherwise fail to participate in the bonding required for an appeal or to pay their proportionate or jury-allocated share of a judgment. As a result, under certain circumstances, we may have to pay more than our proportionate share of any bonding- or judgment-related amounts. Furthermore, in those cases where plaintiffs are successful, we also may be required to pay interest and attorneys’ fees. Although PM USA has historically been able to obtain required bonds or relief from bonding requirements in order to prevent plaintiffs from seeking to collect judgments while adverse verdicts have been appealed, there remains a risk that such relief may not be obtainable in all cases. This risk has been substantially reduced given that 47 states and Puerto Rico limit the dollar amount of bonds or require no bond at all. As discussed below, however, tobacco litigation plaintiffs have challenged the constitutionality of Florida’s bond cap statute in several cases and plaintiffs may challenge state bond cap statutes in other jurisdictions as well. Such challenges may include the applicability of state bond caps in federal court. States, including Florida, also may seek to repeal or alter bond cap statutes through legislation. Although we cannot predict the outcome of such challenges, it is possible that our consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial position could be materially affected in a particular fiscal quarter or fiscal year by an unfavorable outcome of one or more such challenges. We record provisions in our condensed consolidated financial statements for pending litigation when we determine that an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. At the present time, while it is reasonably possible that an unfavorable outcome in a case may occur, except to the extent discussed elsewhere in this Note 10. Contingencies : (i) management has concluded that it is not probable that a loss has been incurred in any of the pending cases; (ii) management is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss that could result from an unfavorable outcome in any of the pending cases; and (iii) accordingly, management has not provided any amounts in our condensed consolidated financial statements for unfavorable outcomes, if any. Litigation defense costs are expensed as incurred. We have achieved substantial success in managing litigation. Nevertheless, litigation is subject to uncertainty and significant challenges remain. It is possible that our consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial position could be materially affected in a particular fiscal quarter or fiscal year by an unfavorable outcome or settlement of certain pending litigation. We believe, and have been so advised by counsel handling the respective cases, that we have valid defenses to the litigation pending against us, as well as valid bases for appeal of adverse verdicts. We have defended, and will continue to defend, vigorously against litigation challenges. However, we may enter into settlement discussions in particular cases if we believe it is in our best interests to do so. Judgments Paid and Provisions for Tobacco and Health (Including Engle Progeny Litigation) and Certain Other Litigation Items: The changes in our accrued liability for tobacco and health and certain other litigation items, including related interest costs, for the periods specified below are as follows: For the Three Months Ended March 31, (in millions) 2022 2021 Accrued liability for tobacco and health and certain other litigation items at beginning of period $ 91 $ 9 Pre-tax charges for: Tobacco and health and certain other litigation (1) 12 35 Related interest costs — — Payments (103) (36) Accrued liability for tobacco and health and certain other litigation items at end of period $ — $ 8 (1) Includes judgments, settlements and fee disputes associated with tobacco and health and certain other litigation. The accrued liability for tobacco and health and certain other litigation items, including related interest costs, was included in accrued liabilities on our condensed consolidated balance sheets. Pre-tax charges for tobacco and health and certain other litigation were included in marketing, administration and research costs on our condensed consolidated statements of earnings. Pre-tax charges for related interest costs were included in interest and other debt expense, net on our condensed consolidated statements of earnings. After exhausting all appeals in those cases resulting in adverse verdicts associated with tobacco-related litigation, since October 2004, PM USA has paid judgments and settlements (including related costs and fees) totaling approximately $909 million and interest totaling approximately $227 million as of March 31, 2022. These amounts include payments for Engle progeny judgments (and related costs and fees) totaling approximately $410 million and related interest totaling approximately $56 million. Security for Judgments: To obtain stays of judgments pending appeal, PM USA has posted various forms of security. As of April 25, 2022, PM USA has posted appeal bonds totaling approximately $50 million, which have been collateralized with restricted cash that are included in assets on our condensed consolidated balance sheets. Overview of Tobacco-Related Litigation Types and Number of U.S. Cases: Claims related to tobacco products generally fall within the following categories: (i) smoking and health cases alleging personal injury brought on behalf of individual plaintiffs; (ii) health care cost recovery cases brought by governmental (both domestic and foreign) plaintiffs seeking reimbursement for health care expenditures allegedly caused by cigarette smoking and/or disgorgement of profits; (iii) e-vapor cases alleging violation of RICO, fraud, failure to warn, design defect, negligence, antitrust and unfair trade practices; and (iv) other tobacco-related litigation described below. Plaintiffs’ theories of recovery and the defenses raised in tobacco-related litigation are discussed below. The table below lists the number of certain tobacco-related cases pending in the United States against us as of: April 25, 2022 April 26, 2021 April 27, 2020 Individual Smoking and Health Cases (1) 163 162 109 Health Care Cost Recovery Actions (2) 1 1 1 E-vapor Cases (3) 3,744 2,150 202 Other Tobacco-Related Cases (4) 3 3 4 (1) Includes as of April 25, 2022, 18 cases filed in Illinois, 17 cases filed in New Mexico, 42 cases filed in Massachusetts and 53 non- Engle cases filed in Florida. Does not include individual smoking and health cases brought by or on behalf of plaintiffs in Florida state and federal courts following the decertification of the Engle case (these Engle progeny cases are discussed below in Smoking and Health Litigation - Engle Class Action ). Also does not include 1,408 cases brought by flight attendants seeking compensatory damages for personal injuries allegedly caused by exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (“ETS”). The flight attendants allege that they are members of an ETS smoking and health class action in Florida, which was settled in 1997 ( Broin ). The terms of the court-approved settlement in that case allowed class members to file individual lawsuits seeking compensatory damages, but prohibited them from seeking punitive damages. Class members were prohibited from filing individual lawsuits after 2000 under the court-approved settlement. (2) See Health Care Cost Recovery Litigation - Federal Government’s Lawsuit below. (3) Includes as of April 25, 2022, 53 class action lawsuits, 2,891 individual lawsuits and 800 “third party” lawsuits relating to JUUL e-vapor products, which include school districts, state and local government, tribal and healthcare organization lawsuits. JUUL is an additional named defendant in each of these lawsuits. The 53 class action lawsuits include 28 cases in the Northern District of California (“Multidistrict Litigation” or “MDL”) involving plaintiffs whose claims were previously included in other class action complaints but were refiled as separate stand-alone class actions for procedural and other reasons. (4) Includes as of April 25, 2022, one inactive smoking and health case alleging personal injury and purporting to be brought on behalf of a class of individual plaintiffs and two inactive class action lawsuits alleging that use of the terms “Lights” and “Ultra Lights” constitute deceptive and unfair trade practices, common law or statutory fraud, unjust enrichment, breach of warranty or violations of RICO. International Tobacco-Related Cases: As of April 25, 2022, (i) Altria is named as a defendant in three e-vapor class action lawsuits in Canada; (ii) PM USA is a named defendant in 10 health care cost recovery actions in Canada, eight of which also name Altria as a defendant; and (iii) PM USA and Altria are named as defendants in seven smoking and health class actions filed in various Canadian provinces. See Guarantees and Other Similar Matters below for a discussion of the Distribution Agreement (defined below) between Altria and Philip Morris International Inc. (“PMI”) that provides for indemnities for certain liabilities concerning tobacco products. Tobacco-Related Cases Set for Trial: As of April 25, 2022, five Engle progeny cases and one individual smoking and health case against PM USA are set for trial through June 30, 2022. Trial dates are subject to change and many of the trials were postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the courts are reopening and additional trials may be scheduled for the remainder of 2022. Trial Results: Since January 1999, excluding the Engle progeny cases (separately discussed below), verdicts have been returned in 70 tobacco-related cases in which PM USA was a defendant. Verdicts in favor of PM USA and other defendants were returned in 45 of the 70 cases. These 45 cases were tried in Alaska (1), California (7), Connecticut (1), Florida (10), Louisiana (1), Massachusetts (5), Mississippi (1), Missouri (4), New Hampshire (1), New Jersey (1), New York (5), Ohio (2), Pennsylvania (1), Rhode Island (1), Tennessee (2) and West Virginia (2). One case in Massachusetts, Main , where the verdict was initially returned in favor of PM USA, was reversed on appeal and remanded for a new trial. Of the 25 non- Engle progeny cases in which verdicts were returned in favor of plaintiffs, 22 have reached final resolution, and one case ( Principe ) that was initially returned in favor of plaintiffs was reversed post-trial and remains pending. See Smoking and Health Liti gation - Engle Progeny Trial Results below for a discussion of verdicts in state and federal Engle progeny cases involving PM USA as of April 25, 2022. Smoking and Health Litigation Overview: Plaintiffs’ allegations of liability in smoking and health cases are based on various theories of recovery, including negligence, gross negligence, strict liability, fraud, misrepresentation, design defect, failure to warn, nuisance, breach of express and implied warranties, breach of special duty, conspiracy, concert of action, violations of unfair trade practice laws and consumer protection statutes, and claims under the federal and state anti-racketeering statutes. Plaintiffs in the smoking and health cases seek various forms of relief, including compensatory and punitive damages, treble/multiple damages and other statutory damages and penalties, creation of medical monitoring and smoking cessation funds, disgorgement of profits, and injunctive and equitable relief. Defenses raised in these cases include lack of proximate cause, assumption of the risk, comparative fault and/or contributory negligence, statutes of limitations and preemption by the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act. Non- Engle Progeny Litigation: Summarized below are the non- Engle progeny smoking and health cases pending during 2022 (or recently concluded) in which a verdict was returned in favor of plaintiff and against PM USA. Charts listing certain verdicts for plaintiffs in the Engle progeny cases can be found in Smoking and Health Litigation - Engle Progeny Trial Results below. Principe : In February 2020, a jury in a Florida state court returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff and against PM USA, awarding approximately $11 million in compensatory damages. There was no claim for punitive damages. PM USA appealed the trial court verdict to the Third District Court of Appeal and, in September 2021, the appellate court reversed the trial court’s decision and found in favor of PM USA. Plaintiff moved for a rehearing before the Third District Court of Appeal, which the court denied in March 2022. In April 2022, plaintiff filed a notice to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of the Florida Supreme Court. Greene : In September 2019, a jury in a Massachusetts state court returned a verdict in favor of plaintiffs and against PM USA, awarding approximately $10 million in compensatory damages. In May 2020, the court ruled on plaintiffs’ remaining claim and trebled the compensatory damages award to approximately $30 million. In February 2021, the trial court awarded plaintiffs attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of approximately $2.3 million. In July 2021, following denial of PM USA’s post-trial motions, PM USA appealed the judgment to the Appeals Court of Massachusetts, which appeal remains pending. Laramie : In August 2019, a jury in a Massachusetts state court returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff and against PM USA, awarding $11 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages. PM USA appealed and, in February 2021, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court asserted jurisdiction over the appeal. In September 2021, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the trial court award of $21 million in compensatory and punitive damages. PM USA recorded a pre-tax provision of approximately $27.1 million in the third quarter of 2021 and paid $30.3 million (including the judgment and interest) in December 2021. Gentile : In October 2017, a jury in a Florida state court returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff and against PM USA, awarding approximately $7.1 million in compensatory damages and allocating 75% of the fault to PM USA. PM USA appealed. In September 2019, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the judgment entered by the trial court, granted PM USA judgment on certain claims and remanded for a new trial on the remaining claims. Plaintiff petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for further review, which the court denied in January 2021. In March 2022, PM USA settled with plaintiff, concluding the case. Federal Government’s Lawsuit : See Health Care Cost Recovery Litigation - Federal Government’s Lawsuit below for a discussion of the verdict and post-trial developments in the United States of America health care cost recovery case. Engle Class Action: In July 2000, in the second phase of the Engle smoking and health class action in Florida, a jury returned a verdict assessing punitive damages totaling approximately $145 billion against various defendants, including $74 billion against PM USA. Following entry of judgment, PM USA appealed. In May 2003, the Florida Third District Court of Appeal reversed the judgment entered by the trial court and instructed the trial court to order the decertification of the class. Plaintiffs petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for further review. In July 2006, the Florida Supreme Court ordered that the punitive damages award be vacated, that the class approved by the trial court be decertified and that members of the decertified class could file individual actions against defendants within one year of issuance of the mandate. The court further declared the following Phase I findings are entitled to res judicata effect in such individual actions brought within one year of the issuance of the mandate: (i) that smoking causes various diseases; (ii) that nicotine in cigarettes is addictive; (iii) that defendants’ cigarettes were defective and unreasonably dangerous; (iv) that defendants concealed or omitted material information not otherwise known or available knowing that the material was false or misleading or failed to disclose a material fact concerning the health effects or addictive nature of smoking; (v) that defendants agreed to misrepresent information regarding the health effects or addictive nature of cigarettes with the intention of causing the public to rely on this information to their detriment; (vi) that defendants agreed to conceal or omit information regarding the health effects of cigarettes or their addictive nature with the intention that smokers would rely on the information to their detriment; (vii) that all defendants sold or supplied cigarettes that were defective; and (viii) that defendants were negligent. In August 2006, PM USA and plaintiffs sought rehearing from the Florida Supreme Court on parts of its July 2006 opinion. In December 2006, the Florida Supreme Court refused to revise its July 2006 ruling, except that it revised the set of Phase I findings entitled to res judicata effect by excluding finding (v) listed above (relating to agreement to misrepresent information), and added the finding that defendants sold or supplied cigarettes that, at the time of sale or supply, did not conform to the representations of fact made by defendants. In February 2008, the trial court decertified the class. Pending Engl e Progeny Cases: The deadline for filing Engle progeny cases expired in January 2008, at which point a total of approximately 9,300 federal and state claims were pending. As of April 25, 2022, approximately 813 state court cases were pending against PM USA or Altria asserting individual claims by or on behalf of approximately 1,005 state court plaintiffs. Because of a number of factors, including docketing delays, duplicated filings and overlapping dismissal orders, these numbers are estimates. While the 2015 federal Engle agreement resolved nearly all Engle progeny cases pending in federal court, as of April 25, 2022, two cases were pending against PM USA in federal court representing the cases excluded from that agreement. Engle Progeny Trial Results: As of April 25, 2022, 138 federal and state Engle progeny cases involving PM USA have resulted in verdicts since the Florida Supreme Court Engle decision. Seventy-six verdicts were returned in favor of plaintiffs and eight verdicts ( Skolnick , Calloway , Oshinsky-Blacker, McCoy, Mahfuz, Neff, Frogel and Gloger ) that were initially returned in favor of plaintiffs were reversed post-trial or on appeal and remain pending. Fifty-four verdicts were returned in favor of PM USA, of which 44 were state cases. In addition, there have been a number of mistrials, only some of which have resulted in new trials as of April 25, 2022. The jury in one case, Garcia , awarded plaintiff compensatory damages and found plaintiff was entitled to punitive damages; however, the court declared a mistrial in the second phase of the trial regarding punitive damages because the jury was unable to determine the amount of the punitive damages. Four verdicts ( Pearson, D. Cohen , Collar and Chacon ) that were returned in favor of PM USA were subsequently reversed for new trials. Juries in two cases ( Reider and Banks ) returned zero damages verdicts in favor of PM USA . Juries in two other cases ( Weingart and Hancock ) returned verdicts against PM USA awarding no damages, but the trial court in each case decided to award plaintiffs damages. One case, Pollari, resulted in a verdict in favor of PM USA following a retrial of an initial verdict returned in favor of plaintiff. Plaintiff and defendants appealed the verdict and the appellate court affirmed the judgment in favor of the defendants. Three cases, Gloger , Rintoul ( Caprio ) and Duignan , resulted in verdicts in favor of plaintiffs following retrial of initial verdicts returned in favor of plaintiffs. Post-trial appeals are pending in Rintoul ( Caprio ) and Duignan, while the verdict in Gloger was reversed upon appeal and the case was remanded for a new trial. Two cases, Freeman and Harris , resulted in an appellate reversal of a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff, and a judgment in favor of PM USA. The chart below lists the verdicts and post-trial developments in certain Engle progeny cases in which verdicts were returned in favor of plaintiffs. The chart lists cases that are pending as of April 25, 2022 but where PM USA has determined an unfavorable outcome is not probable and the amount of loss cannot be reasonably estimated. Unless otherwise noted for a particular case, the jury’s award for compensatory damages will not be reduced by any finding of plaintiff’s comparative fault. Further, the damages noted reflect adjustments based on post-trial or appellate rulings. As of April 25, 2022, there is no Engle progeny case where PM USA has recorded a provision in its condensed consolidated financial statements because PM USA has not determined for any currently pending case that an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. References below to “R.J. Reynolds,” “Lorillard” and “Liggett Group” are to R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Lorillard Tobacco Company and Liggett Group, LLC, respectively. Currently Pending Engle Cases with Verdicts Against PM USA (rounded to nearest $ million) Plaintiff Verdict Date Defendant(s) Court Compensatory Damages (1) Punitive Damages Post-Trial Status Schertzer April 2022 PM USA and R.J. Reynolds Miami-Dade $3 million $0 PM USA plans to file one or more post-trial motions. Lipp September 2021 PM USA Miami-Dade $15 million $28 million Appeal by defendant to Third District Court of Appeal pending. Garcia May 2021 PM USA Miami-Dade $6 million Mistrial Appeals by plaintiff and defendant to Third District Court of Appeal pending. Duignan February 2020 (2) PM USA and R.J. Reynolds Pinellas $3 million $12 million Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment against defendants. Defendants’ petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for review. Case stayed pending Florida Supreme Court decision in Prentice . (3) Cuddihee January 2020 PM USA Duval $3 million $0 Appeal by defendant to First District Court of Appeal pending. Rintoul ( Caprio ) November 2019 (2) PM USA and R.J. Reynolds Broward $9 million $74 million Appeals by plaintiff and defendants to Fourth District Court of Appeal pending. Gloger November 2019 (2) PM USA and R.J. Reynolds Miami-Dade $15 million $11 million Third District Court of Appeal reversed the judgment against defendants and remanded for a new trial. Plaintiff Verdict Date Defendant(s) Court Compensatory Damages (1) Punitive Damages Post-Trial Status McCall March 2019 PM USA Broward <$1 million (<$1 million PM USA) $0 New trial ordered on punitive damages. Neff March 2019 PM USA and R.J. Reynolds Broward $4 million $2 million Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the judgment against defendants and remanded for a new trial. Plaintiff’s petition for review to the Florida Supreme Court pending. Mahfuz February 2019 PM USA and R.J. Reynolds Broward $12 million $10 million Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the judgment against defendants and remanded for a new trial. Florida Supreme Court denied plaintiff’s petition for review of the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s decision. Holliman February 2019 PM USA Miami-Dade $3 million $0 Appeal by defendant to Third District Court of Appeal pending. Chadwell September 2018 PM USA Miami-Dade $2 million $0 Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the compensatory damages award. Defendant’s petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for review. Case stayed pending Florida Supreme Court decision in Prentice . (3) Kaplan July 2018 PM USA and R.J. Reynolds Broward $2 million $2 million Florida Supreme Court vacated the punitive damages award in accordance with the decision in Sheffield (3) . The Fourth District Court of Appeals remanded the case to the trial court. R. Douglas November 2017 PM USA Duval <$1 million $0 Awaiting entry of final judgment by the trial court. Sommers April 2017 PM USA Miami-Dade $1 million $0 Third District Court of Appeal affirmed compensatory damages award and granted new trial on punitive damages. Florida Supreme Court denied PM USA’s petition for review of the Third District Court of Appeal’s decision. PM USA paid approximately $1 million for the compensatory damages award and awaits the new trial on punitive damages. Cooper ( Blackwood ) September 2015 PM USA and R.J. Reynolds Broward $5 million (<$1 million PM USA) $0 Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed judgment and granted a new trial on punitive damages. D. Brown January 2015 PM USA Federal Court - Middle District of Florida $8 million $9 million Appeal by defendant to U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit stayed pending Florida Supreme Court decision in Prentice . (3) (1) PM USA’s portion of the compensatory damages award is noted parenthetically where the court has ruled that comparative fault applies. (2) Plaintiff’s verdict following a retrial of an initial verdict in favor of plaintiff. (3) PM USA is not a defendant in Sheffield or Prentice . Both cases are discussed below in Engle Progeny Appellate Issues . Engle Progeny Appellate Issues: Appellate decisions in the following Engle progeny cases may have wide application to other Engle progeny cases: In Mary Sheffield v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company , an Engle progeny case against R.J. Reynolds only, the Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict among Florida’s District Courts of Appeal finding that the 1999 amendments to Florida’s punitive damages statute (including its caps and bar on multiple punitive damages awards for the same course of conduct) apply in wrongful death cases where the decedent was injured prior to the October 1, 1999 effective date of the amendments but died from his or her injuries after such effective date. In Linda Prentice v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company , an Engle progeny case against R.J. Reynolds only, the Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict among Florida’s District Courts of Appeal finding that in order for an Engle plaintiff to prevail on fraudulent concealment and conspiracy claims, plaintiff must prove that the smoker relied to his or her detriment on a statement that concealed or omitted material information about the health risks or addictiveness of smoking. The Florida Supreme Court declined to revisit its prior decisions giving preclusive effect to the Engle Phase I findings, described above in Engle Class Action . Plaintiffs filed a motion seeking rehearing on the proper remedy for cases in which the court’s jury instructions did not comply with the Florida Supreme Court’s decision in Prentice . Florida Bond Statute: In June 2009, Florida amended its existing bond cap statute by adding a $200 million bond cap that applies to all state Engle progeny lawsuits in the aggregate and establishes individual bond caps for individual Engle progeny cases in amounts that vary depending on the number of judgments in effect at a given time. Plaintiffs have been unsuccessful in various challenges to the bond cap statute in Florida state court. No federal court has yet addressed the constitutionality of the bond cap statute or the applicability of the bond cap to Engle progeny cases tried in federal court. From time to time, legislation has been presented to the Florida legislature that would repeal the bond cap statute; however to date, no legislation repealing the statute has passed. Other Smoking and Health Class Actions: Since the dismissal in May 1996 of a purported nationwide class action brought on behalf of allegedly addicted smokers, plaintiffs have filed numerous putative smoking and health class action suits in various state and federal courts. In general, these cases have purported to be brought on behalf of residents of a particular state or states (although a few cases have purported to be nationwide in scope) and have raised addiction claims and, in many cases, claims of physical injury as well. Class certification has been denied or reversed by courts in 61 smoking and health class actions involving PM USA in Arkansas (1), California (1), Delaware (1), the District of Columbia (2), Florida (2), Illinois (3), Iowa (1), Kansas (1), Louisiana (1), Maryland (1), Michigan (1), Minnesota (1), Nevada (29), New Jersey (6), New York (2), Ohio (1), Oklahoma (1), Oregon (1), Pennsylvania (1), Puerto Rico (1), South Carolina (1), Texas (1) and Wisconsin (1). See Certain Other Tobacco-Related Litigation below for a discussion of “Lights” and “Ultra Lights” class action cases and medical monitoring class action cases pending against PM USA. As of April 25, 2022, PM USA and Altria are named as defendants, along with other cigarette manufacturers, in seven class actions filed in the Canadian provinces of Alberta, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Ontario. In Saskatchewan, British Columbia (two separate cases) and Ontario, plaintiffs seek class certification on behalf of individuals who suffer or have suffered from various diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, heart disease or cancer, after smoking defendants’ cigarettes. In the actions filed in Alberta, Manitoba and Nova Scotia, plaintiffs seek certification of classes of all individuals who smoked defendants’ cigarettes. In March 2019, all of these class actions were stayed as a result of three Canadian tobacco manufacturers (none of which is related to us) seeking protection under Canada’s Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (which is similar to Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the United States). The companies entered into these proceedings following a Canadian appellate court upholding two smoking and health class action verdicts against those companies totaling approximately CAD $13 billion. See Guarantees and Other Similar Matters below for a discussion of the Distribution Agreement between Altria and PMI, which provides for indemnities for certain liabilities concerning tobacco products. Health Care Cost Recovery Litigation Overview: In the health care cost recovery litigation, governmental entities seek reimbursement of health care cost expenditures allegedly caused by tobacco products and, in some cases, of future expenditures and damages. Relief sought by some but not all plaintiffs includes punitive damages, multiple damages and other statutory damages and penalties, injunctions prohibiting alleged marketing and sales to minors, disclosure of research, disgorgement of profits, funding of anti-smoking programs, additional disclosure of nicotine yields, and payment of attorney and expert witness fees. Although there have been some decisions to the contrary, most judicial decisions in the United States have dismissed all or most health care cost recovery claims against cigarette manufacturers. Nine federal circuit courts of appeals and eight state a |
