Summary
This Appellate Division, Second Department decision affirms a Supreme Court order denying the plaintiffs' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b) to dismiss the defendant's affirmative defense. The underlying action alleges violations of the Cigarette Marketing Standards Act through impermissible cigarette rebates. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish that the defendant's good faith meeting competition pricing defense was without merit as a matter of law.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred in denying the motion to dismiss the defendant's affirmative defense alleging the good‑faith "meeting competition" exception to the Cigarette Marketing Standards Act.
Holdings
- The trial court properly denied the motion; the affirmative defense is not without merit as a matter of law.
Key quotations
“The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(b) to dismiss HLA's affirmative defense alleging the good faith "meeting competition" exception to the CMSA.”
Factual background
Plaintiffs alleged that HLA, a licensed cigarette agent, offered impermissible rebates in violation of the Cigarette Marketing Standards Act. HLA asserted a good‑faith "meeting competition" defense, which the plaintiffs sought to have dismissed.
Procedural history
The plaintiffs sued HLA alleging violations of the Cigarette Marketing Standards Act. HLA raised a good‑faith "meeting competition" affirmative defense. The trial court denied the plaintiffs' motion to dismiss that defense. The plaintiffs appealed.