Subject:     Sklaroff vs Big Tobacco & PA AG
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1999

Cancer doctor blocks Pennsylvania tobacco deal
by Tracy Sacco

NEW YORK, July 27 (Reuters) - A Philadelphia doctor is blocking Pennsylvania's settlement with tobacco companies
that could provide $11 billion for cancer research and anti-smoking programs, because he fears tobacco companies
will be protected from future lawsuits.

The settlement agreement, reached last year among 46 states and the major tobacco companies, ``basically gives carte
blanche immunity to the tobacco industry for all class action lawsuits,'' Dr. Robert Sklaroff said in an interview.

State officials are frustrated at Sklaroff's success so far in blocking Pennsylvania's effort to finalize its share of the $206
billion nationwide tobacco pact. They also contend Sklaroff's fears that the settlement would foreclose future lawsuits were
baseless.

The irony of a cancer specialist fighting a deal that could provide billions for research, anti-smoking campaigns and
health insurance is not lost on Pennsylvania Attorney General Mike Fisher.

``There are 12 million Pennsylvanians and one guy is holding up $11.3 billion -- and that guy is a doctor,'' Sean Connolly, a
spokesman for Fisher, said in a telephone interview.

In Pennsylvania, as in nine other states across the country, unresolved litigation must be cleared away before the $206
billion can begin flowing to the states.

The pact requires 80 percent of states representing 80 percent of the settlement allocation to settle all outstanding appeals.
Once that occurs, states reach a final stage known as ``state-specific finality.'' If too few states meet the requirements, the pot
of money won't begin to flow until June 30, 2000.

Pennsylvania, with the third largest amount of tobacco dollars after California and New York, could play a key role in boosting the percentages to the needed level. But if an appeal in Pennsylvania or any other state isn't settled by the final deadline of Dec. 31, 2001, the agreement is terminated, and the state ends up empty handed.

The Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas denied Sklaroff standing to pursue his case against the settlement in January,
but he still has an appeal pending in Commonwealth Court that must be resolved before Pennsylvania can achieve state-specific finality.

Although Fisher's office is hopeful the Commonwealth Court will dismiss the case soon, Sklaroff said he would most likely appeal to the next level -- the state Supreme Court.

``The danger here is that the state Supreme Court would take even longer'' in reaching a decision, bringing the state dangerously close to the 2001 deal-breaker deadline, Connolly said.

In addition to his claims about future lawsuits, Sklaroff is also fighting several of the settlement's ``offset'' provisions, or clauses that could decrease the amount of money the state ultimately receives. He said they were unconstitutional and against public
policy.

Connolly called those claims ``frivolous.''