CTR
¶On November 6, 1998, pursuant to the terms of a consent judgment entered in the State of
¶Minnesota case and a plan of dissolution approved by the New York State Supreme Court, CTR was dissolved under the New York Not-for-Profit Corporation Law upon its filing of a certificate of voluntary dissolution with the Secretary of State of the State of New York. McAllister WD at
¶10:20-13:25; 1998 CTR Certificate of Voluntary Dissolution, (JE 021048); 1998 State of Minnesota
¶Settlement Agreement, (JD 012501); 1998 State of Minnesota Consent Judgment, (JD 093326);
¶1998 CTR Plan of Dissolution, (JD 093330); 1998 Order of the Supreme Court of the State of New
¶York, (JD 093333).
¶The MSA expressly prohibits the tobacco companies from reconstituting CTR, or any successor companies performing similar activities. See (US 64359) (§ III(o)(5)) ("The Participating
¶Manufacturers may not reconstitute CTR or its function in any form.").
¶In an effort to demonstrate that it is not reasonably likely to violate RICO in the United States in the future, BATCo argues that it conducts no business in the United States and that it is unlikely to have anything more than "incidental" contact with tobacco manufacturers in the United States. JD Br. at 126-127. In addition to the fact that future action within the United States is not required, each of these assertions is inaccurate. First, BATCo conducts business in the United States through an agreement with Lane Limited (which is now owned by Reynolds American, Inc.), which sells and markets millions of BATCo's State Express 555 brand cigarettes in the United States. (no bates) (US 77453). Second, BATCo continues to participate with other Defendants in international organizations that play an important role in the operation of the Enterprise, such as Tobacco Mfrs. Association and CECCM. Third, BATCo remains closely affiliated with Reynolds American, Inc., the parent company of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. See JD FF Chap. 12, § IV.D.1. ¶¶ 338, 343, 345. In light of BATCo's extensive participation in the Enterprise's violations of 1962(c) and (d) and the ongoing activities described here, the Court finds BATCo's arguments on its reasonable likelihood of future RICO violations wholly unpersuasive.
1644¶In the spring of 1997, in anticipation of the possibility of its dissolution, CTR suspended the review, approval and funding of new grants. See McAllister WD at 11:4-22; (no bates) (JD 090039) (1997 CTR Annual Report). Under the Plan of Dissolution, the moratorium on new grants became permanent. CTR accelerated the funding of grants that had been awarded as of April 1997, paying out the last of the grant funds by the end of March 1999. CTR's last Annual Report was published in the spring of 1998. See McAllister WD at 13:12-25; see, e.g., (no bates) (JD 093371).
¶Since it made its final payments to grantees in March 1999, CTR has existed as a dissolved corporation for the limited purpose of winding up its activities, including storing, maintaining, and making available CTR historical documents and defending itself and its member companies in litigation. See McAllister WD at 10:24-11:3, 14:20-15:6; 1998 CTR Plan of Dissolution, (JD 093330 at §§ 5, 6).
¶CTR has had no employees since November 30, 2004. Dr. McAllister, now serving as a part-time consultant to CTR, remains responsible, as CTR's appointed agent, for ensuring that CTR meets its continuing legal obligations as a dissolved corporation. See McAllister WD at 1:7-14. CTR has had no office since the end of 2004. See McAllister WD at 14:1-14.
¶In sum, no new CTR Special Projects were initiated after 1986. The last check drafted to fund a CTR Special Project was written in 1990. See McAllister WD at 219:6-10. CTR issued its last press release in 1997. See McAllister WD at 219:13-14. CTR's last Annual Report (the 1997 Annual Report) was issued in the spring of 1998. See McAllister WD at 219:11-12. CTR stopped funding all scientific research in March 1999 -- more than six years ago. See McAllister WD at
1645¶Consequently, CTR is unable to "continue alleged past RICO violations." See Mem. Op. and Order #549 (at 6 n.5) ("The Court is not unsympathetic to the arguments of CTR and TI [made in their Joint Motion for Summary Judgment], who have effectively ceased to exist and seem to have no actual ability to continue alleged past RICO violations. The Court hopes that the Government will exercise good litigation judgment in its assessment of what, if any, value there is in proceeding against CTR and TI."). Accordingly, even though CTR is liable for past violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (c) and (d), there is no reasonable likelihood of future violations, and therefore no remedies will be entered against CTR.