July 8 (Bloomberg) -- Altria Group Inc., the largest U.S. tobacco producer, and Reynolds American Inc. were accused in a consumer lawsuit of fraudulent marketing by claiming “light” cigarettes were less harmful than regular cigarettes.

The suit filed by three Tennessee residents on behalf of smokers who bought “light” or “ultra-light” cigarettes in the state since Jan. 1, 2005, seeks class-action, or group, status.

The tobacco companies “have known for decades that filtered and low-tar cigarettes do not offer a meaningful reduction of risk to smokers,” the plaintiffs said in the complaint, filed in Nashville federal court yesterday. “Their marketing, which emphasized reductions in tar and nicotine, was false and misleading.”

The lawsuit is unsuitable for class-action status because a wide array of individual issues prompt people to choose light cigarettes, Jack Marshall, a spokesman at Philip Morris, said in a telephone interview.

“We will aggressively defend against these claims and believe that these new claims, like others already rejected by many courts, have no legal basis and should be dismissed,” Marshall said.

David Howard, a spokesman for R.J. Reynolds, declined to comment because he said the company hasn’t been served with the lawsuit.

2006 Racketeering Conviction

Altria and Reynolds were convicted of violating racketeering laws in August 2006 when U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler found the companies conspired for decades to defraud the public by marketing cigarettes as “light” or “low-tar.” The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington in May upheld the conviction that also bars the companies from labeling the cigarettes as “light.”

The companies had argued the ban on “light” and “low- tar” descriptors would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and would “fundamentally alter the business landscape.”

Philip Morris and Reynolds said they planned to appeal the appeals court ruling.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision in December, allowed smokers to sue over the marketing of “light” cigarettes. The justices said a federal labeling law doesn’t shield cigarette makers from suits accusing them of deceiving consumers through “light” or “low-tar” labeling.

In the Tennessee suit, Kaye Alcorn, David Alcorn and Tracey Alcorn, all of Davidson County, said they first smoked regular- strength cigarettes and switched to “lights” and “ultra- lights” because they believed that since those brands delivered less tar and nicotine they were less harmful.

Addiction to Nicotine

“Having learned recently that light cigarettes are not less harmful than regular cigarettes, plaintiffs are attempting to quit smoking but their addiction to nicotine has made quitting extremely difficult,” they say in the statement of claim.

The U.S. government’s National Cancer Institute has concluded that smoking light cigarettes rather than regular cigarettes provides no benefit to smokers’ health, according to the complaint.

Philip Morris, based in Richmond, Virginia, sells brands including Marlboro Lights and Marlboro Ultra Lights. Winston- Salem, North Carolina-based R.J. Reynolds’s brands include Winston Lights.

The case is Alcorn v. Philip Morris USA Inc., Altria Group Inc., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Reynolds American Inc., 09cv0624, U.S. District Court of Middle Tennessee (Nashville).

To contact the reporters on this story: Joe Schneider in Toronto at jschneider5@bloomberg.net; Laurence Viele Davidson in Atlanta at lviele@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: July 8, 2009 16:43 EDT