Close

Sun Subscriber Website Login




Username:  

Password:  



Please wait....
 
 
News Story
Updated: 03/15/2013 01:19:00AM

Florida justices rule in case on smoker’s death

Share this story:


By JAMES L. ROSICA

Associated Press

Text Size:


TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Florida’s highest court decided Thursday not to upset its own landmark decision that makes it easier for thousands of sick smokers or their survivors to pursue lawsuits against tobacco companies.

In a 6-1 decision, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed a $2.5 million Tampa jury verdict in the death of smoker Charlotte Douglas. Justice Charles Canady dissented.

The majority re-approved the court’s “Engle” decisions accepting that Big Tobacco knowingly sold dangerous products and hid the hazards of cigarette smoking. The Engle cases say individual smokers can file their own suits but don’t have to prove those factors again in their cases.

Plaintiffs do have to show that they or dead relatives were addicted to smoking, couldn’t quit and that cigarettes caused illness or death.

David Boies, the New York lawyer representing Philip Morris USA, had argued that procedure violates the due process rights of his client and other tobacco companies, including R.J. Reynolds Tobacco and Liggett Group.

A call to Boies was referred to a spokeswoman who did not immediately return a call. Boies also represented Democrat Al Gore in Florida’s 2000 presidential election recount.

Jon Mills, a Tallahassee attorney who represents tobacco plaintiffs, said the companies keep trying — unsuccessfully — to challenge well-established law.

“Their whole due process argument has been, ‘we just don’t know which cigarette they’re talking about,’ but that doesn’t matter,” he said. “It’s settled that cigarettes were sold by these defendants, contained nicotine and were dangerous ... It doesn’t matter what brand or what particular cigarette.”

Justice Canady disagreed, writing that the Engle decisions were enough to establish that some, but not all, cigarettes sold by the defendants were “defective and unreasonably dangerous.”

“Nor is it sufficient to establish that the particular brands of cigarettes consumed by Mrs. Douglas were defective and unreasonably dangerous,” Canady wrote.

Attorney Steven Brannock of Tampa represents James Douglas, Charlotte Douglas’ surviving spouse.

“We thought this is the way they were going to go,” he said. “The court agreed with all our arguments and how Engle was decided.

“The tobacco companies have gotten more due process than any company has ever gotten,” Brannock added.

The Engle decisions turned Florida into a favored venue for plaintiffs seeking damages from tobacco companies.

In the past, cigarette manufacturers won when it was too hard to prove that cigarettes caused a particular illness, or when jurors decided plaintiffs need to be responsible for their decision to smoke. Now, plaintiffs have won more than $360 million in damage awards in only about two dozen cases.

Still more cases are lined up in Florida, which had more pending smoking-related lawsuits than any other state.

A 1998 mega-settlement resulted in four cigarette companies ponying up $206 billion to 46 states that claimed smoking drove up public health costs.

In 2006, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., found the six largest tobacco companies guilty of racketeering and fraud for deceiving the public about the dangers of smoking. The ruling, upheld by an appeals court in May 2009, requires that cigarette manufacturers change the way they market cigarettes.

The ruling was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the justices declined to hear it.


Reader Comments (1)

Previous Page | Next Page

Submit your comment below:







  

* = Required information

Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or antisocial behavior such as "spamming", "trolling", or any other inappropriate material will be removed from the site. We will take steps to block users who violate any of our terms of use. You are fully responsible for the content you post. All comments must comply with the Terms and Conditions of this site and by submitting comments you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.


ADVERTISEMENT