Camel Cash Class Action Receives Long-Awaited Cert.

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

The California members of a Camel Cash class action lawsuit recently won a significant victory after a federal judge certified a putative Class on counts of breach of contract and promissory estoppel, the latest step in a case that has wended its way through the court system for years.

The development came after the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s decision to dismiss the class action lawsuit. It found that the plaintiffs had detailed valid underpinnings of a breach of implied contract between the plaintiffs who had signed up for Camel Cash rewards and R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. In the original class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs had argued that while the company set up the program to allow smokers to redeem “Cash” for regular products, in the last edition of the catalog they were only allowed to do so for other tobacco products.

R.J. Reynolds had offered a number of arguments why the class action lawsuit should fail. The company argued that it held an undisputed right to terminate the program at will and that the program could not be considered indefinite. More specifically, the company argued that it could not reasonably be required to retain merchandise for as long as any rewards program members held any redeemable Camel Cash.

The judge did agree with the cigarette maker that a nationwide Class would not be feasible. California state consumer protection statutes and case law are stronger than those in any other state. Given that the plaintiffs are relying on a breach of implied covenant between themselves and the company, it would be impossible to try the class action lawsuit under the laws of other states.

As a result, the putative Class will include the thousands of Camel Cash holders in California at the time the cigarette maker issued its 2006 announcement that rewards would only include tobacco products. The judge failed to find persuasive the defendant’s argument that not all smokers would be affected.

Rather, the triable question of law is the lack of opportunity, according to the judge. And the company’s very announcement indicated that an implied covenant was plausibly in place as the plaintiffs claim regarding the Camel Cash program.

The Class is represented by Lionel Z. Glancy and Marc L. Godino of Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP and Jeffrey H. Squire, Patrick J. O’Donnell, David J. Stone and Lawrence P. Eagel of Bragar Wexler Eagel and Squire PC.

The Camel Cash Class Action Lawsuit is Amanda Sateriale, et al. v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Case No. 2:09-cv-08394, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

UPDATE: On Jan. 8, 2016, the plaintiff filed a motion seeking preliminary approval of a settlement which would resolve the Camel Cash class action lawsuit.

UPDATE 2: On Feb. 9, 1016, Top Class Actions received new details regarding the Camel class action settlement. The final hearing date has been set for May 2, 2016. The objection deadline has been set for April 11, 2016. A new settlement website has been established for this case, www.CamelCashSettlement.com. And the potential award for Class Members has been determined to include non-tobacco merchandise.

UPDATE 3: On May 5, 2016, the Court granted final approval of the Camel Cash class action settlement.