Landmark Settlements and Unintended Consequences

34 Pages Posted: 27 Sep 2012

See all articles by Andrew J. Haile

Andrew J. Haile

Elon University School of Law

Matthew Krueger-Andes

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Date Written: 2012


Nearly fourteen years ago forty-six states and the nation’s major tobacco manufacturers entered into the Master Settlement Agreement, the largest civil settlement in United States history. This Article examines a current controversy under the MSA that may require some or all of the states to forfeit over $7 billion in MSA payments to tobacco manufacturers. The Article focuses particularly on the liability exposure that New York faces in the dispute and how New York’s seemingly unrelated policy of not collecting excise taxes on cigarettes sold on Native American reservations may end up costing the state billions of dollars in MSA payments. The current dispute under the MSA and New York’s particular circumstances in that dispute are explored in detail to extract pertinent lessons that states should consider when entering into future landmark settlement agreements. They include lessons relating to the terms of the settlement agreement itself, but also relating to the use of litigation by state attorneys general as a means of changing public policy.

Suggested Citation

Haile, Andrew J. and Krueger-Andes, Matthew, Landmark Settlements and Unintended Consequences (2012). University of Toledo Law Review, Forthcoming, Available at SSRN:

Andrew J. Haile (Contact Author)

Elon University School of Law ( email )

201 N. Greene Street
Greensboro, NC 27401
United States

Matthew Krueger-Andes

North Carolina Court of Appeals

One West Morgan Street
P.O. Box 2779
Raleigh, NC 27602
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics