In Myers v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc. (2002) 28 Cal.4th 828, the Supreme Court considered the following question, certified to it by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, "Do the amendments to Cal. Civ. Code 1714.45 that became effective on January 1, 1998, apply to a claim that accrued after January 1, 1998, but which is based on conduct that occurred prior to January 1, 1998?" (Myers v. Phillip Morris Companies, Inc. (9th Cir. 2001) 239 F.3d 1029, 1030.) In answer to that question, the court first held that permitting product liability suits to proceed against tobacco companies for supplying tobacco products to smokers during the immunity period would constitute a retroactive application of the Repeal Statute, regardless of when the plaintiff's cause of action formally accrued. (Myers, supra, 28 Cal.4th at p. 840.) The court then held that the Legislature did not intend to apply the Repeal Statute retroactively (id. at pp. 840-845), and explained that constitutional considerations reinforced its reading of the Repeal Statute as not having retroactive application. (Id. at pp. 845-847.) Because the Repeal Statute is not retroactive, the court concluded the plaintiff Betty Myers has no product liability claim against the defendant tobacco companies for their conduct in manufacturing and distributing cigarettes during the statutory immunity period. (Id. at p. 847.)