The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Jan.18 to decide whether smokers can sue tobacco companies for allegedly deceptive ad claims for light cigarettes.

A federal judge initially threw out a suit filed by three Maine residents against Altria Group Inc. and its Philip Morris USA Inc. subsidiary that alleged the advertising of light cigarettes was unfair and deceptive.

Philip Morris contends a class-action suit involving Marlboro Lights should be dismissed because it is pre-empted by the Federal Trade Commission's regulation of cigarette advertising, which says states can't impose any requirements on the advertising or promotion of cigarettes.

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston reinstated the suit.

The plaintiffs say the cigarette company advertised its light cigarettes as low in tar and nicotine even though it knew smokers took deeper puffs to increase the nicotine they received, according to the Associated Press.

The court's decision on whether federal law bars such lawsuits may determine the fate of more than 30 similar lawsuits around the country against Philip Morris, Reynolds American Inc.'s R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and other cigarette makers.

In 1992, a splintered Supreme Court said the law barred some, though not all, smoker lawsuits against tobacco companies.

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Jan.18 to decide whether smokers can sue tobacco companies for allegedly deceptive ad claims for light cigarettes.

A federal judge initially threw out a suit filed by three Maine residents against Altria Group Inc. and its Philip Morris USA Inc. subsidiary that alleged the advertising of light cigarettes was unfair and deceptive.

Philip Morris contends a class-action suit involving Marlboro Lights should be dismissed because it is pre-empted by the Federal Trade Commission's regulation of cigarette advertising, which says states can't impose any requirements on the advertising or promotion of cigarettes.

The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston reinstated the suit.

The plaintiffs say the cigarette company advertised its light cigarettes as low in tar and nicotine even though it knew smokers took deeper puffs to increase the nicotine they received, according to the Associated Press.

The court's decision on whether federal law bars such lawsuits may determine the fate of more than 30 similar lawsuits around the country against Philip Morris, Reynolds American Inc.'s R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and other cigarette makers.

In 1992, a splintered Supreme Court said the law barred some, though not all, smoker lawsuits against tobacco companies.