MINNESOTA Tobacco Documents News
MINNESOTA Tobacco Documents News
1998
Note: These articles wink in and out of existence with the frequency of sub-atomic particles. Many links will be dead. In that case, these pages can be approached as bibliographies, both noting the event, and showing where you might look for further information.
05/12/98 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT The Minnesota agreement05/12/98 CONSENT JUDGEMENT from Judge Fitzpatrick 05/08/98 HUMPHREY ACHIEVES HISTORIC $6.1 BILLION SETTLEMENT OF TOBACCO LAWSUIT Minnesota AG Press Release After a four year legal battle with the tobacco industry, Attorney General Hubert H. Humphrey III and Andy Czajkowski, CEO of co-plaintiff Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota, today announced a historic agreement that requires the industry to pay $6.1 billion to the State of Minnesota and imposes the strongest ban in the nation against marketing cigarettes to children. The landmark agreement requires disclosure of secret tobacco documents, unprecedented reform of the industry, closure of the tobacco research and propaganda arm, the Council for Tobacco Research, and first-in-the-nation bans on tobacco branded merchandise and secret payments for using cigarettes in movies.
05/08/98 REALAUDIO: "They have surrendered and they have surrendered on our terms" WCCO-TV
AUDIO FILES from Ch. 4000
06/02/98 Tobacco on Trial History of the trial from July 13, 1996 to May 18, 1998, with linked stories. From Ch. 4000 MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE TRANSCRIPTS: Minnesota v. Tobacco MORE TRANSCRIPTS are being posted by the Putnam Pit First Amendment Center Is the timely release of our court and legislative documents for the rich, or corporate entities only? Or do they belong to the people whose government it is? The dirty little secret about the sale and trade of the records of our own government's proceedings like pork belly futures. Here's the letter threatening legal action and here's the Putnam Pit's response 01/30/98 Released Documents Page None posted yet.
04/22/98 39,000 TOBACCO DOCUMENTS House Commerce Site 05/21/98 39,000 Documents on CD $1500. Rios Computer PR 04/24/98 Sampler of the 39,000 documents 04/28/98 Tobacco Documents Subpoenaed by the House Committee on Commerce Mirror site from STIC. Better organized, faster downloads than Bliley's site; full index available, too. 04/28/98 Minnesota Documents from STIC 04/24/98 Docuents sorted by Chronology 04/17/98 TRIAL EXHIBIT SEARCH ENGINE 01/22/98 An Update on Minnesota's Tobacco Litigation on Eve of Trial 01/22/98 Office of the Attorney General Litigation News Update Links to newspaper articles. 02/11/98 HOT QUOTES from Minnesota's Tobacco Trial Trial Transcripts SUSPENDED! All the below transcript links are DEAD. How's that for a free and open society? Because of contractual issues with the court reporter, we are unable to provide unlimited access to the transcripts.
01/12/98 Orders by Judge Kenneth J. Fitzpatrick [NEW LINK] The State of Minnesota and Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Minnesota vs. Philip Morris Inc., et al Case File #62-C1-94-008565
12/20/97 843 Minnesota Documents
Minnesota Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tobacco WebSite
- Trial Exhibits The released documents, as they're released
- Witness List
- Fact Sheets
- 04/07/98 Document Quick View from Minnesota Blue Cross
Here is a quick view of 20 documents from tobacco companies that the jury is seeing in the case of the state and Blue Cross versus Big Tobacco. . . Smoking and Health, Nicotine Addiction, Nicotine Manipulation, Marketing to Kids.
- Minnesota Resources/News Archive Tobacco BBS
01/21/98 Minnesota Tobacco Litigation from the St. Paul Pioneer Press. Features include web links, archives, chat, a daily briefing and a nice Trial Guide St. Paul Pioneer Press 01/22/98 Tobacco on Trial from the Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune. Stories, a WWII + timeline, plus a trial timeline, trial details, web links, bulletin board. If You're Going . . . Courtroom schedule, upcoming witnesses, procedure for seating from the Minnesota court system 02/20/98 If you want to go . . . Short precis from Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune
- Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), one of tobacco's strongest foes, commended Bliley. "I think he was genuinely determined to get these documents," Waxman said after the hearing. "I don't see an ulterior motive. . . . I think he is sincere and genuine."
- Rep. Thomas J. Bliley Jr., chairman of the House Commerce Committee and an unlikely inquisitor of the tobacco industry, demanded yesterday that tobacco companies turn over certain secret internal documents or face the threat of a subpoena. A Richmond Republican, Bliley has defended the tobacco industry for years. . . A letter yesterday from Bliley to Geoffrey Bible, chairman of Philip Morris Cos. Inc., asked for the company to turn over by Dec. 4 those 864 documents that a Minnesota court official has determined were improperly shielded by attorney-client privilege claims. If the documents aren't turned over, "I will consider issuing a subpoena on Dec. 5," Bliley added in the letter.
- Both J. Phil Carlton, a North Carolina lawyer who represented the industry in negotiations leading up to the settlement, and Lance Morgan, a Washington spokesman for the companies, said they would not comment until they had received a formal written request for the documents from Bliley. Tobacco analyst Gary Black of Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. in New York dismissed Bliley's move as an attempt to publicly establish his independence from the industry. "It's a way of making yourself look tough," Black said. "This is the opposite of Teddy Roosevelt--speak loudly and carry a little stick." Another analyst said Bliley's action is a sign of how much tobacco's fortunes have eroded in Congress.
- Thomas Bliley, a Virginia Republican, said the industry must disclose the documents that a Minnesota court official has concluded are not protected through attorney-client privilege because they have evidence about crime and fraud. Those documents, a small part of a huge trove of papers amassed during litigation, are part of ongoing judicial proceedings in Minnesota and have not been made public. "If the tobacco industry engaged in criminal or fraudulent activities, then Congress has a right -- a duty -- to know before legislation is enacted granting that industry any form of immunity against lawsuits," Bliley said as he opened the first House hearings on the proposed tobacco settlement.
- "We deserve to know the full extent of the industry's knowledge of the health risks associated with tobacco use," he said. "We need to know the full extent of the industry's knowledge about marketing appeals to children. We need to know whether the tobacco industry engaged in activities to hide this information from the American people." The tobacco companies have never come clean on these questions. The real surprise would be if they even begin to do so in response to Chairman Bliley's pertinent demands.
- Spokesman Scott Williams denied news reports saying that the industry had decided not to comply with the demand and had informed House Commerce Committee Chairman Thomas Bliley that he would have to subpoena them. "The companies are still reviewing and considering the request," Williams told Reuters.
- Cigarette makers plan to wait until Thursday's deadline to answer a congressional request for documents and may decide to resist . . . The cigarette companies probably will tell Bliley that to release the documents would compromise the companies' ability to defend themselves in the upcoming Minnesota trial and other cases, said the industry representatives . . . Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch has refused to subpoena the documents
- Bliley's seeming turnaround mystifies many observers on Capitol Hill and leaves others skeptical. . . Yet relations between the powerful congressman and the industry have been increasingly tense. The chairman has expressed frustration that a tobacco settlement proposed last summer did not address the concerns of such groups as retailers, according to one Bliley adviser, and he wanted to send a signal to the industry that it will face compromises ahead. Other sources say Bliley wants the documents released so that lawmakers will not be blindsided by tobacco revelations coming out after a bill passes.
- But a Bliley aide said UST will not be subpoenaed because it is not part of the Minnesota case. . . Two Democratic Senators, Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, wrote Bliley a letter this week praising him but also asked him to broaden his requesst to get many other industry documents that the senators wrote could shed light "on the manipulation of nicotine and other health issues the companies have hidden from the public."
- "I am going to make sure these documents see the light of day," Bliley, R-Va., said in a statement. "Congress is going to get these documents, and I'm not going to tolerate unnecessary delays in obtaining them." "If the tobacco industry engaged in criminal or fraudulent activities, then Congress needs to know about these activities before we consider granting the industry unprecedented immunity from future lawsuits," he said. A Bliley aide confirmed that the subpoenas were being served late Thursday to four cigarette makers: Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson and Lorillard Inc. Bliley said he was giving the companies until noon Friday to comply
- Matthew L. Myers, of the National Center for Tobacco-Free Kids, said he hoped that Bliley's comments were not an indication that the documents would be kept private. "It's as important for the American public to see these documents as for Congress -- so that the citizens of the country can make an informed decision about what Congress should do," Myers said.
- But lawyers battling the tobacco industry warned that the two boxes of documents submitted to Rep. Tom Bliley, R-Va., in Washington, represent only a fraction of the confidential papers shielded by tobacco industry lawyers. "The smoking guns are trickling out, but the smoking howitzers remain under lock and key," Minnesota Attorney General Hubert Humphrey III said, referring to 250,000 additional industry documents being sought in court. The 834 documents submitted to Bliley include scientific research papers, memos and reports.
- Many experts said the nation's four top tobacco firms were placing a high-stakes bet: Releasing the papers could hurt their chances in pending state lawsuits. But it also could speed approval of a $368.5 billion deal, now before Congress, that would settle all such lawsuits. "These were documents that were going to come out anyway," said Calvert Crary, a legal analyst with Auerbach, Pollak & Richardson in Stamford, Conn. "So I think the industry is just trying to get political mileage out of it."
- The four companies each sent a separate cover letter to House Commerce Committee Chairman Thomas Bliley, who Thursday night had subpoenaed more than 800 potentially damaging documents. The Virginia Republican gave the companies less than 24 hours to deliver the papers after they failed to meet an earlier deadline. Copies of the four letters were made available to Reuters. "Under these circumstances we have no choice but to comply with the subpoena," wrote Alfonso Carney, a Philip Morris Cos. Inc. (NYSE:MO - news) vice president.
- Minutes before a noon deadline, industry officials delivered two boxes of documents to the House Commerce Committee, which Bliley serves as chairman. . . . The cache's contents weren't revealed yesterday, but industry observers have said they contain information about joint scientific research and legal strategy, as well as studies of teen smoking.
- The nation's largest cigarette makers ended a confrontation with a longtime congressional ally today by complying with subpoenas to release more than 800 documents that purportedly illustrate industry crime and fraud. . . Now, Bliley said he will establish "a bipartisan process for reviewing and disclosing the documents." "Congress has a right to examine these documents as part of its consideration of the proposed tobacco settlement, and today's development will give Congress the information it needs to make more informed and responsible decisions," he said in a statement.
- House Commerce Committee Chairman Tom Bliley, R-Va., promised Monday to release more than 800 sensitive tobacco company documents, probably before Christmas. Meanwhile, congressional hearings defused a debate about dividing tobacco settlement payoffs, after state and federal officials found they had little to fight about.
- Bliley said documents that his panel subpoenaed from Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Brown and Williamson and Lorillard Inc. will be made public after a bipartisan review. "I want to assure members of the committee and the American people that we will work as quickly as possible to make these documents available to the public," he said.
- "It is my intention to release all documents to the public," he said. "I expect that this will occur prior to Christmas," although he said that was a goal, not an absolute deadline.
- "Now that the committee has obtained the documents, a process for bipartisan, committee review of the documents will begin," said Rep. Thomas Bliley, R-Va., chairman of a House Commerce health subcommittee. "When that process is completed, it is my intention to release all documents to the public," Bliley said, probably by Christmas.
- And as a subcommittee of Mr. Bliley's commerce panel begins hearings on the proposed settlement Monday, industry executives are left to wonder whether they can count on him in the long run to help protect their interests. The tobacco companies say they intended no offense. "From the industry's perspective, it was only a matter of timing and sequence," says industry spokesman Scott Williams. . . Mr. Bliley says he subpoenaed the documents because he is concerned that the proposed settlement grants the industry extensive legal protections without first forcing it to divulge secret documents.
- The Minnesota court created 12 subject categories to review hundreds of Liggett Group documents. The 864 records deemed by the court to contain potentially damaging evidence fall into five of them. The categories include records about industry-sponsored research on the health effects of smoking performed either by company officials or consultants; records of research projects financed by industry lawyers or through industry trade organizations; documents reflecting public statements by companies on the risks of smoking, and documents reflecting industry activities aimed at youths under 18. . . Bliley has said that he would seek any other company records, along with the Liggett documents, deemed by the Minnesota court to contain possible evidence of wrongdoing.
- "Today these documents will be available to everyone with access to the Internet," Chairman Bliley said. "I've said all along that it is important that Congress and the American people have the facts, and today they will have them."
- The House Commerce Committee intends to make public more than 800 secret tobacco-company documents today, giving the public its first look at records the tobacco companies have been trying to keep under wraps for years. The decision to release the records came less than a day after a Minnesota judge ruled that the 834 documents -- which include research on nicotine and marketing to youth -- had been improperly shielded from disclosure when cigarette-makers said they were covered by attorney-client privilege.
- We continue to believe that continued controversy and confrontation serve no useful purpose and delay the inevitable need to implement a national tobacco policy. Those who believe 20 -- or 40 -- year old documents merit continuation of legal and regulatory hostilities in lieu of a national legislative solution fail to see what is at stake. We must learn from, but not be obsessed by, events past, and recognize the value of a comprehensive national policy and the promise it holds for the future. Only such a comprehensive settlement, agreed to by the tobacco companies, will result in meaningful, national progress with respect to a reduction in youth smoking and responsible regulation of the design, manufacturing and marketing of tobacco products.
- As the special master's report indicates, the documents show that the different cigarette makers cooperated with each other to a far great extent than previously believed, he stated. For example, the documents describe what is called the "mouse incident," in which Philip Morris ordered RJR to shut down some biological research which could have been embarrassing to the industry. . . There is also growing suspicion, says Banzhaf, that Philip Morris conspired with Commerce Committee Chairman Thomas Bliley, known as the "Congressman from Philip Morris," to orchestrate the release of the documents long before serious consideration of federal tobacco legislation begins, and in a form which makes it difficult for the media and others to appraise them. "Instead of releasing the documents in text form where they could be easily downloaded, searched for key words, and copied, Bliley posted digital pictures which are very slow to download, cannot then be searched, and which require special programs to handle," says Banzhaf. Banzhaf suggests that the media download a copy of the report of the special master from the Commerce Committee's Internet Web site or ASH's (http://ash.org) because it singles out and quotes from many of the most incriminating documents.
- One of the world's largest cigarette companies considered admitting nearly 20 years ago that smoking causes disease, according to a report in Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. considered breaking ranks with the industry in 1980 because denying a link between smoking and disease was "simply not believed," Special Master Mark Gehan wrote in a report made public Wednesday.
- "The industry is unable to argue satisfactorily for its own continued existence because all the arguments eventually lead back to the primary issue of causation, and on this point, our position is unacceptable," the 1980 B.A.T document stated, according to a report prepared by Mark W. Gehan, the court-appointed official. The judge ordered the report released late Tuesday after ruling that documents in the case showed that industry executives and their lawyers had engaged in a long-running "conspiracy of silence and suppression of scientific research" about the dangers of smoking.
- Tobacco industry research in the United States was coordinated by a group of cigarette manufacturers' attorneys with the intention of providing favorable results about smoking and health, a judicial officer in Ramsey County determined earlier this year. The report of Special Master Mark Gehan, unsealed Tuesday in the state of Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry, said a "Committee of Counsel" selected research projects to bolster the industry's position that smoking did not cause disease. The research was for use in lawsuits, government testimony and public relations matters.
- Attorneys for tobacco companies scrambled Wednesday to respond to a judge's order to release 800 industry documents to the state. . . Late Tuesday, Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick gave the companies five days to release the documents.
- Tobacco companies for decades used their lawyers to conceal smoking research, then engaged in "abuse and disregard for the judicial process" during a recent court-ordered review of the practice, a judge in St. Paul ruled Tuesday. The ruling by Ramsey County District Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick is a sweeping indictment of Big Tobacco's use of lawyer-client privilege to prevent disclosure of documents related to children, special research projects, science and other subjects. "The court's own review of the documents reveals a conspiracy of silence and suppression of scientific research," the judge wrote. In another rebuke to cigarette makers, Fitzpatrick concluded their lawyers violated court orders and abused the legal process during a special master's review of industry "privileged" documents this year.
- With sometimes scathing language, Ramsey District Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick blasted the tobacco industry for improperly hiding sensitive documents behind attorney-client privilege claims and ordered the files' release to attorneys for the state of Minnesota.
- "Did the defendants claim privilege for such material to create more of a 'haystack' in which to hide their 'needles?' Did they fail to conduct a review of the documents sufficient to make a good-faith claim of privilege in the first instance? Whatever the reason, claiming privilege where none even arguably exists constitutes abuse," Fitzpatrick wrote. "Moreover, a pattern of abuse taints the entire submission." Still to come is a decision by Gehan on 150,000 more documents that the companies are trying to keep secret.
- 'One of the principles the President articulated for a tobacco settlement was a full disclosure of documents relevant to an understanding of the issues,' said White House Spokesman Mike McCurry. 'The President believes the release of these documents adds further momentum to the effort to achieve the type of settlement he has suggested,' McCurry added. However, President Clinton has never fully defined how he views the issue of immunity for the tobacco industry, a key issue from the industry's point of view.
- While containing no dramatic new revelations, the huge cache of documents helps bring into focus a picture described by previously released documents: the industry's strategy to undercut a growing scientific consensus on the health risks of smoking, anti-tobacco activists said. "Not a single [document] is definitive in any single way," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), "but there's a pattern of very sophisticated, long-term efforts by the tobacco industry to find scientists who will cast doubt on the idea that smoking is dangerous, and to mislead the public."
- A new debate over proposed federal tobacco legislation erupted in Congress Thursday after the release of hundreds of cigarette company documents . . .
- The 847 documents show an industry under siege that turned to a core group of lawyers to coordinate a multilayered defense relying on science, public relations and political muscle.
- What happened? The House Commerce Committee used the Internet to release more than 800 potentially sensitive tobacco industry documents gathered as part of Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry. - Why now? . . .
- Among the materials seen for the first time Thursday were: * A 1967 memo suggesting that celebrities such as the Monkees, the Supremes and John (sic) Unitas be hired to pitch smoking in television commercials because they are "persons who young people admire and respect."
- Prominent Republicans, including Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John McCain of Arizona predicted a thorough review of the documents before Congress takes any action. Various House and Senate panels will seek extensive testimony on the documents' "legal and policy ramifications during in-depth hearings early next year," Sen. McCain said. In a joint statement, the big tobacco companies declined to comment on the specifics of the documents, citing their position taken in court proceedings that the documents remain privileged. "It should also come as no surprise that the tobacco companies needed and sought advice of lawyers, given the adversarial environment of the last four decades," they added, noting that the issues raised in the documents "are not new."
- "Buried inside these documents are some of the most lethal hand grenades we've ever seen the industry throw at America's children," said Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, D-N.J. and a leading tobacco foe. "What's so scary about the revelations is that these documents aren't even the ones that the industry is so afraid to release. Without releasing the remaining documents to Congress, the tobacco industry can kiss any form of their settlement goodbye," he added.
- But he added that the 834 documents, disclosed over an Internet site, show no new "smoking gun" against cigarette manufacturers.
- Releasing the companies' secrets on the World Wide Web gives the 65-year-old congressman a fresh image, said University of Virginia government professor Larry Sabato. It may allow him to discard the snide appellation tobacco foes pinned on him years ago, "the congressman from Philip Morris." It may realign his long relationship with Philip Morris: "Instead of the puppet, he his now the puppeteer," Sabato said. And it could give him the credibility to help broker a deal, not as tobacco's man in Congress, but as the leader of a powerful House committee.
- The tobacco documents were painstakingly scanned by staff members, in their original form, directly onto the web site. By mid-day, more than 70,000 visitors had logged on to the site.
- Lawyers for cigarette makers deliberately funneled research money into experiments designed to blame almost anything but smoking for lung cancer and other diseases, newly released industry documents show. The grant-handout strategy . . . steered money away from experimental work directly related to tobacco and health.
- Tobacco industry documents released on the Internet this week provide a partial road map to the January trial in St. Paul where cigarette manufacturers will face allegations of fraud and deception.
- "Where they run into trouble and where it becomes immoral is when they deny legitimate science, and they did that," Kluger said. "It was disinformation." What's important, he said, is to use any public outrage that comes from the new documents to push Congress to protect other smokers and those thinking about taking up smoking.
- Buried among hundreds of secret tobacco industry documents released by Congress this week is one that sheds some light on Phil Carlton, the longtime pal of Gov. Jim Hunt who has been the cigarette manufacturers' point man in negotiations on a national smoking settlement. The 1983 document from Carlton to the president of the Tobacco Institute outlined plans to establish a "broad-based, grass-roots national membership organization which would provide a nationwide network of persons supportive of tobacco."
- Unlike the Monkees, whose TV reruns and nostalgia tours have kept them from totally fading out of pop culture, the tobacco industry's exploitative and deceptive tactics must never be allowed a comeback.
- The companies said that Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick of Ramsey County District Court violated their constitutional right to due process by reviewing only sample documents, then ordering entire categories to be turned over. The companies asked the appeals court to make Fitzpatrick review each document separately and follow that procedure in future fights over what documents are subject to the privilege that protects most communications between clients -- in this case , the tobacco companies -- and their attorneys.
- In an article Tuesday, the Associated Press erroneously reported that tobacco companies were granted a stay of a judge's order that they turn over more than 800 internal documents to plaintiffs in Minnesota's lawsuit against the industry. The companies sought time to appeal the order, maintaining the documents are privileged and should not be introduced at trial. The judge took no immediate action on their request.
- A judge on Monday stayed his order that tobacco companies must turn over more than 800 internal documents to plaintiffs in Minnesota's tobacco lawsuit, saying the companies may first appeal his ruling. The cigarette makers said they expected to file their appeal today.
- By early last week, no one had found any "smoking guns" in the hundreds of tobacco industry documents posted on the Internet by the House Commerce Committee. . . "We believe that the documents once again help confirm the public's impression of the tobacco industry as a pariah and as being untrustworthy," said Ethan H. Siegal, president of the Washington Exchange, which provides political advice to institutional investors. . . "The public will read about the documents via the headlines and 200-300 word stories," he wrote. "And those stories will generally be ugly in nature and tone."
- "I can anticipate rulings which would leave us defeated by our own hand," Hardy wrote in a "confidential" memo in 1970, warning one of his tobacco clients, Brown & Williamson, that comments by researchers at its British sister company about the potential dangers of cigarettes might one day be prone to discovery in an American lawsuit. The day Hardy anticipated is here. But cigarette makers are not the only ones facing atonement because of the airing of industry documents.
- Attorneys preparing Minnesota's case against the tobacco industry now have official access to internal company documents that earlier were released on the Internet. . . "It's important to have (the document evidence) in some mode where they could introduce it, and this way they can," said Lee, who is not involved in the Minnesota case.
- I have never suggested dropping the lawsuit. Why would we dedicate the hours of state time and money to a case that we wanted dropped? Rather, I have proposed participating in a national settlement in addition to pursuing the state's lawsuit. Let me say it again: we want to win the state's lawsuit. But no matter how many times we have emphasized this point, it goes ignored by the Star Tribune.
- But across the country, the Minnesota case is well known as Humphrey's lawsuit, mainly because of the independent, sometimes isolated stand he has taken against a once-popular out-of-court national settlement deemed insufficient by the Minnesota DFLer. The course to trial is unpredictable and the consequences significant if Humphrey is wrong. . . "That's a risk," Humphrey said of the possibility of losing in court. "It's like going to war. But even in the event of a loss, we have moved the ball substantially forward. We're not going to lose."
- A St. Paul judge on Tuesday levied the largest sanction ever against a tobacco company, ordering the maker of Lucky Strike cigarettes to pay a $100,000 fine and to hand over 1,114 secret documents. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. of Louisville, Ky., also faces additional fines of $100,000 a day and crippling restrictions at trial if it doesn't comply with orders to produce other documents.
- A Minnesota judge on Tuesday ordered Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. () to pay a $100,000 penalty for "flagrant" violations of pretrial discovery orders, a penalty believed to be the first court sanction against a U.S. tobacco company in decades of health-related litigation. The judge also threatened to issue a default judgment against the nation's third-largest cigarette manufacturer in Minnesota's massive case against the industry if the company fails to disclose potentially damaging documents.
- Fitzpatrick accused the companies, American Tobacco Co. and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Co., which acquired American two years ago, of willful disregard of his order last May requiring the delivery of American Tobacco's records to the state and Blue Cross. The judge said the companies' response to his order was "incomplete, evasive, and lacking in good faith and due diligence." He said B&W's assertion that the records left American's control when it was acquired by B&W in 1994 was "highly suspect and disingenuous."
- A judge fined Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. $100,000 on Tuesday for failing to turn over documents on smoking research . . . Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick ordered the company to turn over the documents within 10 days. He said the company would be fined an additional $100,000 a day if it did not produce the information by the deadline.
- [Besides The Runaway Jury, [t]he companies also want reference to several nonfiction books and publications excluded from the trial, including the books The Cigarette Papers, Ashes to Ashes, and Smokescreen, the Truth Behind the Tobacco In dustry Cover-up, and articles by Stanton Glantz, the author of The Cigarette Papers, published in a 1995 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. Tobacco attorneys say that the publications are nonobjective hearsay based on documents stolen from a law firm representing Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. by a paralegal who tried to extort money from the tobacco company.
- The nation's third-largest cigarette maker says it will pay $100,000 today to the Ramsey County District Court clerk to satisfy a contempt-of-court fine imposed Tuesday by a St. Paul judge. In a letter to the judge, Jack Fribley, a Minneapolis attorney for Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., said the New Year's holiday made it impossible to prepare the check earlier.
- Philip Morris' top scientists in Richmond often questioned their company's spending on supposedly independent research into smoking and health, information released by the House Commerce Committee shows. . . The new information from Congress shows the company's scientists always understood the projects were controlled by industry lawyers.
- The "smoking dog" memos were among 13 documents found by The Times-Dispatch after a computer search of the ones that mention Philip Morris. The letters and reports cover a variety of legal, scientific and public relations problems. The papers show how the line between law and business often became blurred as Philip Morris, like other cigarette companies, tried to fend off attacks on smoking. During the "smoking dog" fracas of 1970, Smith, Philip Morris' legal chief at the time, discussed taking out a newspaper ad to counter the beagle research. He also prepared to dispense pro-industry information at a news conference. "The maximum cost of any media program that we are considering is approximately $500,000," Smith wrote colleagues at other cigarette companies.
- The maker of Lucky Strike, Kool and other cigarettes have given Minnesota attorneys suing the tobacco industry two boxes of documents to comply with a judge's order.
- The state of Minnesota requested Thursday that its smoking-and-health lawsuit against Liggett Group Inc. be officially dismissed under terms of an out-of-court settlement agreed to last March.
- Among those chosen to brief presidential aides was a Minneapolis attorney who probably knows more cigarette company secrets than many people in the industry. The lawyer's name: Roberta Walburn. "She knows the stuff backward and forward," said Minnesota Attorney General Hubert Humphrey III . . . "These cases are won or lost in discovery," said Bill Tilton, a St. Paul lawyer who has known Walburn for 20 years. "The tobacco case would go nowhere without Roberta Walburn doing the discovery. She is the one who has been in the trenches dealing with the other lawyers, dealing with the judge."
- The nation's third-largest cigarette maker, hoping to avoid further contempt-of-court fines, on Friday handed over two boxes of sensitive documents to Minnesota attorneys suing the tobacco industry. . . "We are pulling out all the stops to comply fully with the court order," said Mark Smith, a spokesman for Brown & Williamson, maker of Lucky Strike, GPC and Kool cigarettes.
- The state, charging the tobacco companies with "40 years of lies, fraud and conspiracy," is seeking $1.75 billion in actual damages and unspecified billions more in punitive damages. And the chances that this case will be settled on the eve of trial might be likened to the chances of a snowball in a warm place. "I do not intend to compromise," said Humphrey in a statement Friday. "In Minnesota, the ground rules are different and the line in the snow has been drawn."
- "The next battleground is Minnesota, and the tobacco industry can expect a chilly reception -- in more ways than one," Humphrey said, reading from a statement in his Capitol office. "We can get this thing right either at the negotiating table or in the courtroom," Humphrey said, "but the bottom line is -- we're going to protect kids, expose the truth and bring this outlaw industry to justice."
- Minnesota Attorney General Hubert H. Humphrey III said he is willing to negotiate with cigarette makers on a settlement to recoup money spent treating sick smokers, though he said he won't compromise on cutting teen smoking and exposing industry practices.
- Minnesota Attorney General Hubert H. Humphrey III didn't rule out a settlement, but said the state is preparing to go to trial with the tobacco industry in the state's lawsuit over Medicaid reimbursement. In a press conference here to respond to Texas' expected tobacco settlement, Humphrey said whether the state settles the case or goes to court, he will stand by his goals of document disclosure, protection of children and payment of damage costs. . . "We can get this right either at the negotiating table or in the courtroom, but the bottom line is we are going to protect kids, expose the truth and bring this outlaw industry to justice," he said.
- "I do not intend to compromise." Humphrey says he wants cigarette-makers to release documents proving their culpability, to protect children from smoking and to collect damages. "We have uncovered more tobacco company secrets than anyone in the world and I will not settle for anything that falls short of my goals." He said the fact that the tobacco companies are willing to pay out billions of dollars to settle claims proves they are guilty of wrongdoing. "You don't pay $14 billion if you have done no wrong."
- A Minnesota judge told tobacco industry lawyers Thursday they should be glad he hasn't let them argue that the state has benefited financially from the premature deaths of smokers. . . I'm doing you a favor," he told Murray Garnick, an attorney for Philip Morris. . . "I have difficulty conceiving any jury in the world buying into that concept," Fitzpatrick said.
- State Attorney General Hubert Humphrey III has said repeatedly that there can be no settlement without "full and complete disclosure of the truth." That's a sticking point. If the tobacco companies voluntarily turn over documents, they essentially would waive their traditional defense of attorney-client privilege in future lawsuits, said Morgan Stanley Dean Witter analyst David Adelman. But if they hand over documents during a trial, they wouldn't necessarily waive those rights. That issue could weigh heavily on tobacco lawyers' minds as the trial nears.
- The tobacco industry has had its back to the wall for some time. But now it's facing a firing squad. Starting on Tuesday, in the most widely watched tobacco case yet, Minnesota Attorney General Hubert Humphrey III will start questioning potential jurors in a case that some say is a matter of life and death for the tobacco industry. Unlike three earlier lawsuits brought by Mississippi, Florida, and Texas, this one is not likely to be settled before the bailiff bangs the gavel in state Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick's St. Paul District Court. This is because Mr. Humphrey, son of the late senator, is demanding that the tobacco companies disclose 250,000 documents that he believes will cast the industry as villains. "This litigation is not about money; it's about whether the industry will survive."
- Humphrey doesn't expect his case to have an effect in his state alone. He knows that whenever his trial team releases a new document, Washington will be watching. "As we tell that story in the courtroom," he said, "it's obviously going to be heard not only in the courtroom, but also in the halls of Congress" as lawmakers attempt to fashion a national tobacco deal.
- Five of the jurors were dismissed and four remained in the jury pool today after they were asked questions concerning their views on health problems associated with smoking, whether they thought smoking was addictive, and other queries designed to gauge their attitudes about cigarettes.
- Listen to streaming audio which contains comments from Philip Morris attorney Greg Little and Tom McKim, assistant general counsel, R.J. Reynolds at http://www.newstream.com/r98-11.shtml
- The judge in Minnesota's billion-dollar damage case against tobacco companies addressed 25 prospective jurors Tuesday morning amid reports that settlement talks between the companies and state officials had stalled. Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick was individually questioning potential jurors Tuesday afternoon in an effort to select six jurors and six alternates in the state's fraud and conspiracy suit.
- Michael Ciresi, principal attorney for the state and co-plaintiff Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota, showed up uninvited at a late afternoon media briefing conducted by industry attorneys at the St. Paul Radisson Hotel. Michael Ciresi, right, principal attorney for the state and co-plaintiff Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota, showed up uninvited at a media briefing conducted by Philip Morris attorney Mike York. "I don't think it's a good idea to give a press briefing the night before," Ciresi said. "Don't you want to pick an impartial jury?" Ciresi asked the tobacco industry attorneys. "Do it in a courtroom where it belongs."
- "This is inappropriate," Michael Ciresi said as he walked into a downtown hotel conference room where tobacco lawyers were holding a briefing for the media. "Lawyers who are trying the case really should not be here attempting to give their sides of the story," Ciresi said. "This is going to happen in the courtroom."
- A big score against tobacco could propel Humphrey into the governor's
chair. A standoff could bust him.
- Opposing lead attorneys Michael Ciresi and Peter Bleakley, for the state of Minnesota and Philip Morris Cos., respectively, were in their element, jousting over arcane procedural details. The real dueling starts Tuesday, however, barring an 11th-hour settlement. Ciresi and Bleakley, two highly successful lawyers accustomed to winning, face off in a dramatic confrontation being watched across the country. It promises to be great theater.
- Big Tobacco goes on trial Tuesday in Minnesota in a huge lawsuit that aims to expose nothing short of a 40-year industry conspiracy to deceive consumers and hook them on cigarettes.
- Ramsey County District Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick questioned about two dozen potential jurors this morning from a pool of 180, asking what they know about the companies, state agencies and other groups involved in the case.
- "My father said he told Harry Truman, 'Give 'em hell,' " Humphrey said. "Truman told him, 'It's not hell I'm giving 'em; it's truth, and they think it's hell.' "
- A request for a review of potential expenses in Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry was rejected as premature Tuesday by Legislative Auditor James Nobles. Gov. Arne Carlson's commissioners of commerce, health and human services asked for the review in November after the Republican governor criticized a contract between private lawyers handling the case and DFL Attorney General Hubert Humphrey III.
- As the third day of jury questioning wrapped up, the judge presiding over Minnesota's case against the tobacco industry continued to allow more people into the jury pool despite objection from tobacco companies who said the jurors have negative biases toward the industry.
- Jury selection is moving along briskly in a trial aimed at recouping $1.75 billion in medical costs from the nation's major tobacco companies. A Minnesota judge has okayed 20 potential jurors, seven of whom are smokers, eight non-smokers and five former smokers who all say they can decide the case without allowing their personal feelings about cigarettes to interfere.
- Wednesday's quote: "I'm a smoker, so I don't totally disagree with the tobacco companies," said a smoker of 13 years. "So much smokers' rights have been taken away from them, and it's not the tobacco companies that are doing it."
- Jury selection moved at a faster clip on Wednesday in the Minnesota tobacco trial as most potential jurors testified they would strive to be fair and impartial regardless of their personal opinions on smoking and the tobacco industry. It was a day filled with intense, detailed questioning of 14 potential jurors about their attitudes toward tobacco companies, including whether they think smoking is addictive or cigarettes are marketed to children.
- Even though they're armed with responses previously provided from a detailed juror questionnaire, attorneys for the tobacco industry and the state of Minnesota can't be sure what to expect when they question potential jurors about the issues of smoking and health. . . the level of anti-smoking sentiment continued to be as strong Wednesday as it was Tuesday, when jury selection began and several potential jurors said they could not be impartial to the tobacco industry in a trial involving smoking and health.
- A second day of jury selection in a landmark trial of the nation's largest cigarette makers has resulted in 14 more potential jurors being passed into the jury pool.
- Lawyers defending the tobacco industry against the state's lawsuit are rejecting potential jurors who have already decided that cigarette makers should be punished.
- Of the 23 jurors questioned so far in two days of jury selection here in Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry, 14 have been selected to enter into a jury pool and nine have been dismissed.
- Two jurors with strong opinions against smoking were excused Wednesday in the second day of jury selection for Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry. About half the 14 jurors interviewed so far have been excused either for admitting they can't be fair and impartial or for personal hardship, such as the financial difficulty that being away from their jobs would create.
- An associate professor of molecular biology at the University of Minnesota who received research funding several years ago from the American Cancer Society was among a pool of potential jurors who may be selected to serve in the trial pitting Minnesota against the tobacco industry.
- The first day of jury selection in the Minnesota tobacco trial revealed strong anti-tobacco sentiments that may mean slow progress in finding 12 impartial citizens. Three of the eight potential jurors interviewed by attorneys on Tuesday admitted to biases about smoking or the tobacco industry, and Ramsey County District Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick dismissed them. The judge also dismissed a juror who said the state had no right to sue cigarette makers for consumer fraud because smoking is a matter of individual choice. Three men and one woman -- two of them smokers -- passed the first stage of jury selection. But the final sele
- "Smokers are a little clan of bad people," a woman said sarcastically Tuesday morning as she stubbed out a cigarette in an ugly, monumental sidewalk ashtray on the Fourth Street side of the federal building and hurried back indoors to her job. When I saw her smoking again with another federal office worker during her afternoon break, she refused to talk about the tobacco trial, the perils of smoking outside in Minnesota in January, or anything else. "It's our right to smoke," her friend said defiantly.
- Tuesday was one of the busiest days in years in the Ramsey County courts, highlighted by three murder trials running concurrently, the tobacco case's opening day and a contentious hearing in the indictment of District Judge John Finley. In the tobacco trial, jury selection finally began -- in the federal courts building to accommodate the expected heavy turnout. And the crowd was heavy, featuring a small army of attorneys, a battery of satellite TV trucks outside the building, a gaggle of reporters and camera operators from some leading news outlets -- and, not least, the first batch of 181 previously selected juror candidates arriving for questioning by lawyers.
- A majority of the twelve jurors selected on Friday to hear Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry expressed concerns about the detrimental effects of smoking, and tobacco lawyers immediately cried foul. "The way by which jurors were selected was not fair," tobacco industry lawyer Peter Bleakley said in a motion requesting a new jury. The jurors are "not impartial and unbiased," he said. "Trying to be impartial is not enough."
- Jury selection was completed Friday for Minnesota's trial against the tobacco industry, but the defense made a last-minute request to dismiss the panel because of bias. "It makes no sense to allow this trial to proceed already infected by jury bias and reversible error before the first witness takes the stand," defense laawyers said in their motion. Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick did not rule immediately on the motion filed shortly before the jury was seated
- A jury made up of three smokers, seven former smokers and two non-smokers has been seated to hear Minnesota's suit against the nation's cigarette makers.
- CAPSULE: Attorneys' strategies becoming apparent: They seem very interested in jurors' views of corporate responsibility and personal choice
- What kind of juror is best for each side in the Minnesota tobacco case? For cigarette makers, it probably is someone who feels strongly about personal responsibility. For the attorneys suing the tobacco industry, the best juror thinks big corporations have a responsibility to the public and are capable of wrongdoing.
- Through Thursday, the potential jury of peers for the tobacco industry looked like this: --11 women and nine men; --Predominately white . . .
- One potential juror, identified only as a University of Minnesota associate professor of biology, earlier had cleared the first stage of jury selection even though he admitted supporting a group called INFACT. He also said he had a good friend who served on the organization's board of directors. But after court closed on Wednesday, industry lawyers conducted nighttime research on the World Wide Web to collect information about the Boston-based group. "Indeed, the Web site for INFACT makes clear that the . . . organization is staunchly anti-tobacco," the industry lawyers declared in the motion filed Thursday morning.
- Attorneys questioning potential jurors to hear Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry are finding a majority of those being kept in the pool are smokers or former smokers. It also was evident by the third day of questioning Thursday that most potential jurors have opinions on smoking and are quick to express them.
- QUOTE: "I am questioning my ability to adapt to being so confined," one prospective juror said during questioning. "Is there some medical problem?" Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick inquired. "It will infringe on my free spirit," she responded. She was picked to serve on the jury.
- Monday: Opening statements in the case of the state of Minnesota, et al, vs. Philip Morris, et al, are scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. in a seventh-floor courtroom of the federal courthouse in downtown St. Paul.
- Following are thumbnail sketches of the 12 jurors chosen to hear Minnesota's lawsuit agains the tobacco industry, based on responses to questioning during jury selection. . . No. 7--Man in 20s or 30s. Former smoker who quit in 1991. .
- The final jury contained three smokers, seven former smokers and two who said they've never smoked. Nine of the jurors said they believe smoking is addictive. Ten of the 11 tobacco defendants quickly registered their displeasure with the jury-selection process and asked Ramsey County District Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick to toss out the final pool of 24 from which the jury was chosen and start over.
- Shortly before a 12-member jury panel was scheduled to be picked from a pool of 24 in Minnesota's case against the tobacco industry, lawyers for tobacco companies filed a motion asking the court to dismiss the entire pool, alleging anti-tobacco bias among jurors and saying the court applied the wrong standards in jury questioning.
- The tobacco industry's motion is without merit. A fair and impartial jury has been selected by an appropriate process. We look forward to presenting our case against the tobacco industry beginning Monday morning.
- "Minnesota is unique -- it is not necessarily the next domino to fall," said Elizabeth Whelan, president of the American Council on Science and Health and author of a 1997 report on tobacco settlement prospects.
- The industry defendants had asked him to dismiss the suit on the grounds that the alleged misconduct occurred more than six years before the suit was filed in 1994. But Fitzpatrick said the statute doesn't apply in this instance, because evidence compiled by the state infers "that defendants engaged in a decades-long successful campaign to hide and conceal information from their internal files regarding their misrepresentations and fraud and other wrongdoing."
- "The evidence will show this is a renegade industry which has placed profit ahead of the health of its customers," attorney Michael Ciresi said in his opening statement. "Marlboro has risen to its No. 1 position on the backs of America's youth," he said. Cigarette companies "treated America's youth as a commodity, as a source of replacement smokers."
- The U.S. state of Minnesota opened its lawsuit against the tobacco industry on Monday by portraying big tobacco companies as deceitful in their relentless pursuit of profits at the expense of publichealth.
- Attorneys for Minnesota and Blue Cross Blue Shield today clashed with attorneys for the tobacco industry over whether cigarette makers conspired to lull Americans into thinking smoking is safe.
- "Except for Liggett, which has admitted the addictive nature of nicotine, not one of these defendants has disclosed all that they know," Ciresi said.
- ST. PAUL. Minn., Jan 26 (Reuters) - Ramsey County District Court Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick denied a defense motion Monday seeking a new jury in Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry. Fitzpatrick did stress to the 12-person jury to maintain an open mind in the case, where opening arguments were set to begin on Monday morning.
- A majority of the 12 jurors selected to serve in Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry believe smoking is addictive, and several have close family members who died from smoking-related illnesses, but nearly all said they will do their best to be impartial.
- Tobacco companies, knowing the health problems associated with smoking, nonetheless went to great lengths to cast doubt on independent scientific studies, said the state's lead attorney in his opening statement in Minnesota's case against the tobacco industry.
- http://www.pioneerplanet.com/news/mtc_docs/021034.htm In a flurry of rulings on the eve of opening statements in Minnesota's tobacco trial, Ramsey County District Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick denied cigarette makers' request that the state be barred from seeking their profits if they are found guilty of fraud. The state's allegations cover the time period of 1978-96. The Minnesota Deceptive Trade Practices Act allows the state to recover profits made from illegal activities. How much profit the companies make from the sale of tobacco products is one of the industry's most guarded secrets.
- R.J. Reynolds attorney Robert Webber told a Minnesota jury that his company and others spent millions of dollars researching ways to cut tar and nicotine in cigarettes and develop such products, but they failed in the marketplace where consumers decided they did not like the taste.
- The tobacco industry says nicotine is not the only reason people smoke. Brown & Williamson attorney David Bernick, in his opening remarks today in the Minnesota tobacco trial, says smell, taste, ritual and social setting are part of the allure of cigarettes. He says a study of Marlboro cigarettes shows that its the combination of tobacco types and not the nicotine that makes it so "flavorful" and popular.
- A tobacco lawyer on Tuesday lauded an industry-sponsored research group for its decades of valuable research on smoking and health, denying it is a public relations tool for cigarette companies. Brown & Williamson attorney David Bernick defended the work of the Council for Tobacco Research against a Minnesota lawsuit that seeks to recover state money spent on treating smoking-related illnesses.
- "Smokers in these programs do not cost more than nonsmokers," attorney Peter Bleakley said Monday as opening statements began. "And if that is true, then the state and Blue Cross are not entitled to any damages."
- A Minnesota judge has decided against allowing the tobacco industry to argue smokers' early deaths mitigated the costs of smoking for Minnesota and told the cigarette makers sales tax revenue cannot be used to offset the state's claim for damages.
- "What lawyer wouldn't want to be here?" -- U.S. Attorney David Lillehaug, among those attending the opening statements.
- The state has gathered an unprecedented collection of 33 million pages of internal industry documents that would prove, in "their own secret words," that "the companies waged a decades-long campaign of deceit and misrepresentation . . . in the name of profit," said Michael Ciresi, representing Minnesota and the Blue Cross/Blue Shield insurance company.
- "Deceit, exploitation and greed are the guiding beacons of the tobacco industry," said Michael Ciresi, the lawyer representing the state and Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota. But industry lawyers denied that the nation's largest tobacco companies broke laws, targeted kids, deceived consumers or cost the state and Blue Cross $1.77 billion to treat smokers for lung cancer and other diseases. "People were not in fact deceived," Philip Morris Inc. attorney Peter Bleakley told the jurors.
- Ciresi gave a road map of the state's evidence in his 2 1/2 -hour opening argument. He gave special attention to a national advertisement Jan. 4, 1954, by the industry to smokers titled "Frank Statement." In the ad, the industry's major companies said they had "a special responsibility and duty to the people of America" in the wake of scientific reports linking cancer and smoking. "We accept an interest in people's health as a basic responsibility paramount to every other consideration in our business," the advertisement said.
- Cigarette makers "treated America's youth as a commodity" and manipulated them with advertising to recruit new smokers to replace those who quit or died, a lawyer for the state says. "Marlboro has risen to its No. 1 position on the backs of America's youth," said Michael Ciresi.
- In a steady, calm and meticulous condemnation of the tobacco industry, Minnesota attorney Michael Ciresi relied heavily on cigarette company documents to demonstrate what he said were decades of "deceit, exploitation and greed" during opening statements Monday.
- "The people of Minnesota have known that cigarette smoking is harmful for decades. The public awareness and belief about the health effects of smoking have been universal in this state." -- Philip Morris attorney Peter Bleakley
- Opening statements at the Minnesota smoking-and-health trial in St. Paul had all the elements of a Broadway debut: grand entrances, attentive spectators, plenty of media hoopla and numerous players and props.
- A medical expert testifying in Minnesota's suit against the tobacco industry told a jury on Wednesday that children hooked on smoking have as much difficulty stopping as adults. "If children don't start smoking before they are 21, the chances that they will become smokers are very small," Richard Hurt, director of the Mayo Clinic's Nicotine Dependence Center, said.
- The first witness in a trial seeking $1.75 billion in damages from the nation's largest cigarette makers says that cigarettes are, in essence, an "efficient delivery system" for an addictive drug, nicotine. Dr. Richard Hurt of the Mayo Clinic today says although there's a tendency to blame the smoker, "the smoker isn't the problem, the drug is the problem."
- Beginning today, the state's lawsuit against the tobacco industry will be built through the words, opinions and knowledge of witnesses. First to take the stand will be Dr. Richard Hurt, director of the Mayo Clinic's Nicotine Dependence Center. Hurt's testimony is expected to occupy the remainder of the week.
- Tuesday's quote: "Yes it may be hard to quit, but people do it. Did we say cigarettes are not addictive but habituating? Yes." -- Attorney David Bernick
- David Bernick, lead lawyer for Brown & Williamson, said the plaintiffs--the state of Minnesota and Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Minnesota--will be unable to prove that previous disclosure of the industry's research on tobacco and health would have caused smokers to change their behavior or prompted the state to change the way it regulated cigarette sales.
- A tobacco firm attorney on Tuesday defended the industry's nicotine research, telling a Minnesota jury it's no secret that cigarettes are designed to deliver a specific dose of the drug. "Nicotine is a drug and has pharmacological effects," said David Bernick, a lawyer for Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., who defined pharmacological as any chemically induced effect on the nervous system. "People smoke for a particular dose of nicotine," Bernick said. Bernick and another industry attorney said manufacturers redesigned cigarettes in the 1970s to adjust nicotine and tar content in response to public health concerns about high-tar cigarettes -- not to hook smokers.
- The lawyers said the research into nicotine ‹ the active ingredient in tobacco ‹ and into other cigarette ingredients wasn't secret or sinister but was part of an open scientific debate over the health effects of smoking. The experiments "were our response to outside concerns about nicotine . . . and smoking," said David Bernick, a lawyer for Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. and its American Tobacco Co. property.
- Dow Jones Newswires ST. PAUL, Minn. -- The cigarette is the most efficient delivery form of nicotine, which beats injecting it intravenously, a doctor at the Mayo Clinic testified Wednesday in Minnesota's case against the tobacco industry.
- British tobacco concern B.A.T Industries PLC (BTI) filed a motion to keep the Minnesota tobacco trial from proceeding until an appeals court rules on whether the company can be excluded from the trial. B.A.T filed a motion Tuesday with the Minnesota state Court of Appeals asking for a writ of prohibition restraining the Ramsey County District Court and Judge Kenneth J. Fitzpatrick from further proceeding in the trial.
- A lawyer for the tobacco companies denied allegations by the state of Minnesota that the industry concealed documents, deceived the public and failed to conduct internal research on smoking
- Nicotine is an addictive drug, giving its users cravings that eventually become nearly impossible to deny, a Mayo Clinic expert on dependency testified Wednesday. Dr. Richard Hurt, director of Mayo's Nicotine Dependence Center, testified in Minnesota's lawsuit against the tobacco industry that quitting smoking was the hardest thing he ever did and that smokers have the same characteristics as people with addictions to other substances.
- Tobacco executives and scientists acknowledged decades ago that their primary product was the drug nicotine, not cigarettes, according to internal documents introduced Wednesday in Minnesota's lawsuit against the industry. The documents were submitted to back up fraud charges against the industry
- As smokers turned to seemingly safer cigarettes with low tar and low nicotine, tobacco companies secretly conducted research that showed smokers got neither, according to internal documents released Thursday.
- Moore, a longtime WCCO-TV anchorman, died Wednesday at age 73. He had undergone quadruple bypass surgery in May and had been hospitalized for much of the time since. Dr. Richard Hurt, a Mayo Clinic physician and an expert witness for the state, declared during his testimony: "DAVE MOORE died of coronary artery disease, but he really died of nicotine dependence, because he was a smoker." Hurt used Moore as an example in describing what he called an important criterion of addiction: when people continue to smoke despite physical problems caused by or made worse by smoking.
- Odds & ends A woman who smoked four to five packs of cigarettes a day was so disoriented by nicotine withdrawal that she thought her wristwatch was a rotary-dial telephone.
- Tobacco companies honed the technology of cigarettes -- lowering the tar and nicotine readings, but keeping the product just as addictive and unhealthy, a Mayo Clinic doctor testified Thursday at the Minnesota smoking-and-health trial in St. Paul. Meanwhile, cigarette makers embarked on a "health reassurance" marketing campaign to confuse and convince consumers that smoking low-tar, low-nicotine cigarettes was safer, Dr. Richard Hurt said during his second and final day of direct questioning by Michael Ciresi, lead attorney for the state and Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota.
- Low-tar, low-nicotine cigarettes are no less harmful than regular cigarettes and give smokers a mere illusion of safety, a Mayo Clinic expert testified in the state's tobacco trial.
- While tobacco companies were advertising cigarettes with lower nicotine, researchers were adjusting the drug's acidity so a smaller amount would have more kick, according to documents introduced Thursday in Minnesota's tobacco lawsuit.
- Tobacco companies adjusted pH levels of smoke to enable nicotine to be absorbed into the bloodstream faster, according to Dr. Richard Hurt, director of the Mayo Clinic's Nicotine Dependence Center.
- A witness at Minnesota's $1.75 billion tobacco trial says the nation's tobacco companies have developed a highly addictive form of nicotine by manipulating the pH of smoke. Dr. Richard Hurt of the Mayo Clinic, in his second day of testimony, today says "free" or "freebase" nicotine is the most chemically addictive because of the speed at which it is absorbed into the bloodstream. He says, however, that not all smokers become addicted to nicotine. "There is a range of people who can use it and not become dependent. Just like there is a range of people who can use heroin and not become addicted," Hurt said.
- Tobacco companies are barred from using testimony by individual smokers to deflect Minnesota's legal claims that the cigarette industry conspired to defraud the state of medical expenses incurred to treat diseases caused by smoking. The ruling of Judge Kenneth Fitzpatrick of Ramsey County District Court deals a blow to a key part of the industry's defense -- that individual smokers wouldn't have behaved differently if the companies had disclosed everything. "The actions of individual smokers do not insulate defendants from liability," Fitzpatrick said.
- Hurt, who has written many scholarly articles on nicotine addiction and related subjects, said the degree of knowledge reflected in those documents vastly exceeds what was in the public domain. Many were written at a time when the industry was denying that nicotine was addictive--a stance that many industry executives still maintain in public.
- When a leading expert on nicotine addiction from the Mayo Clinic finally glimpsed the tobacco industry's secret research papers, he says he came away stunned. "I had not even dreamed there was this much work done over the years, especially with regard to pH (chemistry) and nicotine manipulation," Dr. Richard Hurt told a St. Paul jury Wednesday.
- Computer animation and a life-size model of the human body were used to give jurors a science lesson -- how nicotine effects the brain and why it is so hard for smokers to quit. Dr. Richard Hurt, director of the Mayo Clinic's Nicotine Dependence Center, showed jurors Wednesday that cigarette smoke gets nicotine to the brain faster than an intravenous injection and much faster than nicotine patches.
- "Why then is there not a market for nicotine per se, to be eaten, drunk or sucked?" William L. Dunn Jr., a Philip Morris researcher, wrote after taking part in a 1972 Caribbean meeting held by the Council for Tobacco Research. "The cigarette is among the most awe-inspiring examples of the ingenuity of man," Dunn wrote. "The cigarette should not be construed as a product but a package. The product is nicotine."
- Capsule Tobacco industry lawyer David Bernick tries to poke holes in the testimony of Dr. Richard Hurt of the Mayo Clinic, who contends cigarette makers misled smokers about low-nicotine cigarettes.
- The tobacco company lawyer probed and pressed, hoping the Mayo Clinic physician on the witness stand would concede one point -- that millions of Americans have simply quit smoking. "You don't think these people made a choice?" asked David Bernick, a lawyer for Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. "Choice is your word," replied Dr. Richard Hurt, medical director of the clinic's Nicotine Dependence Center. "It is the industry word. It is a bad word."
- The addictive nature of nicotine may have been written about in scientific journals for more than 50 years, but the information didn't reach the consumer, a Mayo Clinic physician has testified. "We're talking about the scientific literature here. ... What's in the scientific literature, if it doesn't make it to the consumer, doesn't get to the right place," Richard Hurt said Friday during cross-examination in the Minnesota trial against the tobacco industry.
- Tobacco companies honed the technology of cigarettes -- lowering the tar and nicotine readings, but keeping the product just as addictive and unhealthy, a Mayo Clinic doctor testified Thursday at the Minnesota smoking-and-health trial in St. Paul.
- The tobacco industry on Friday tried to establish that its development and advertisement of low-tar, low-nicotine cigarettes was encouraged by public health officials and scientific reports. It also submitted that people who quit smoking choose to do so.
- "There have been a number of inquiries (from other insurers) about the possibility of going forward. It will be interesting to see what happens," said Andy Czajkowski, the Minnesota plan's president and chief executive.
- Any day now, a court-appointed official is expected to rule on the legal status of more than 200,000 top-secret corporate documents that could give the state critical evidence enhancing its allegation of industry conspiracy and fraud. Special Master Mark Gehan, a St. Paul private attorney, has spent at least 40 hours a week since last spring reviewing selected segments of the industry material.
- Scheduled to appear in this order are: Channing Robertson, a Stanford University chemical engineer; Walker Merryman of the Tobacco Institute, a defendant in the case; and, if time remains, Bennett LeBow, chief executive officer of The Liggett Group.
- An undated Brown & Williamson internal document described a "Y-1" tobacco strain with a nicotine content of 6.5 percent by weight. "Through genetic engineering they were able to develop a tobacco strain with twice as much nicotine as it might otherwise have," said Channing Robertson, a Stanford University professor. "I am aware that the Y-1 product was contained in cigarettes sold in the United States," Robertson said at another point.
- Today: Robertson continues his testimony and is expected to face cross-examination by lawyers representing tobacco companies.
- Capsule: Channing Robertson, a professor of chemical engineering at Stanford University and an expert on the design of cigarettes, testified about the design of cigarettes as a drug delivery device for nicotine. By the numbers *Lethal dose of nicotine for humans: 40 milligrams. *Amount of nicotine per cigarette: 8 to 15 milligrams.
- A Stanford University professor testifying Tuesday in Minnesota's landmark anti-tobacco case said internal documents spanning five decades show that tobacco firms have long understood that nicotine is addictive and that without it "there would be no cigarette business."