Many thanks to the reader who forwarded the following briefs in In re Tobacco II Cases, no. S147345, in which the Supreme Court will construe Proposition 64's "injury in fact" language:
Opening Brief on the Merits (filed 12/15/06) (new!)
Answer Brief on the Merits (filed 01/30/07) (new!)
Reply Brief on the Merits (filed 02/22/07)
Amicus Curiae Brief of Pacific Legal Foundation (submitted 03/23/07; filed 04/04/07)
Amicus Curiae Brief of Consumer Attorneys of California (submitted 03/26/07)
Amicus Curiae Brief of Pfizer, Inc. (submitted 03/26/07)
Amicus Curiae Brief of Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc. (submitted 03/27/07)
I do not yet have copies of the opening brief on the merits (filed 12/15/06) or the answer brief on the merits (filed 01/30/07). If anyone has copies of additional amicus briefs, please send them to me at email@example.com. According to the docket, more amicus briefs are due to be filed on April 23, 2007.
UPDATES: Thanks to the editor of Mealey's California Section 17200 Report for sending a copy of the opening brief on the merits (filed 12/15/06). Also, thanks to the blog reader who forwarded a copy of the answer brief on the merits (filed 01/30/07). Two other amicus briefs have been submitted, by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights and the Civil Justice Association of California. I do not yet have copies of those. Also, the Supreme Court has granted six requests for extensions of time for other amici curiae to file their briefs. Those briefs are due on April 12 and 23, 2007. Finally, today the Supreme Court granted the Pacific Legal Foundation's application for permission to file its amicus brief. The Pacific Legal Foundation was the first to file an such an application. I anticipate that the rest of the applications will be granted apace.