Philip Morris, Inc. v. Blumenthal, 123 F. 3d 103 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 1997

Plaintiffs-appellants Philip Morris, Inc., RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co., Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, USA, and Lorillard Tobacco Co. (the Tobacco Companies ), appeal from a judgment entered in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Dorsey, C.J.) on an order granting the renewed motion of defendant-appellee Richard Blumenthal, the Attorney General of the State of Connecticut (the Attorney General or the state ), to dismiss the Tobacco Companies\u27 federal action pursuant to the Younger abstention doctrine. The district court found that abstention was appropriate because, inter alia, important state interests were implicated in the state\u27s lawsuit seeking injunctive relief and monetary damages for violations of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act ( CUTPA ), Conn. Gen.Stat. Ann. § 42-110a et seq. (West 1992), the Connecticut Antitrust Act, Conn. Gen.Stat. Ann. § 35-24 et seq. (West 1987 & Supp. 1997), and state common law. For the reasons that follow, we reverse and remand