Tobacco.org

• Cigarette makers renew class action criticism 

In its praise for a decision brought by a Miami U.S. District Court jury in favor of the company and a competitor, cigarette maker Philip Morris USA (NYSE: MO) has reissued its complaints for class action lawsuits.

Criticism over class actions from that company and others comes as cigarette makers await a decision on their appeal to a $145 billion verdict against them and in favor of Florida smokers. . .

Ohlemeyer also said the Allen case, which is unrelated to class action suits, shows why these types of cases should be tried individually.

"Juries must be allowed to decide -on a case-by-case basis - the reasons why a person smokes, their awareness of the health risks and whether a cigarette company improperly influenced their smoking decisions," he said.

Ohlemeyer added juries cannot fairly decide these types of issues when claims of thousands of smokers are lumped together and the case is tried as a class action.

Jump to full article »

• Cigarette makers cleared of blame in smoker's cancer death 

The jury asked for and received copies of testimony from doctors on both sides who disagreed about the cause of photographer Bob Allen's cancer. . .

Family attorneys said the cause was his addiction to cigarettes since age 13. Experts for Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds insisted his cancer spread from his kidneys and the cause will never be known.

Tobacco lawyers said his smoking, alcoholism, obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure and blood pressure medication were possibilities. They had no comment leaving court.

"I have no comment. It's kind of hard right now," said Allen's widow Sylvia. She bowed her head after the verdict was read. Her lead attorney slumped in his chair.

Allen's death certificate listed the cause of death as lung cancer from smoking. Tobacco lawyers blamed that on a public health bias against smoking in a case with no autopsy.

Jump to full article »

• Tobacco Companies Not Liable in Smoker's Death (Update1) 

Philip Morris USA and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., the two largest U.S. cigarette makers, were cleared by a jury of responsibility for a longtime smoker's death.

Relatives claimed James Robert Allen was addicted to cigarettes as a youth and they accused the tobacco companies of targeting minors with advertising and lying to the public about the health risks of smoking. The suit sought $5 million in compensation from Philip Morris, a unit of Altria Group Inc., and R.J. Reynolds, a unit of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings Inc.

The victory was the latest by cigarette makers in suits by individual smokers. The companies lost two mulibillion dollar verdicts in such cases on the West Coast, while fending off similar claims elsewhere. Analysts hadn't viewed the Allen case as a serious threat to the companies.

``Mr. Allen was well aware of the risks of smoking and accepted those risks,'' Philip Morris Associate General Counsel William Ohlemeyer said. ``The law does not permit a person who makes an informed decision to smoke recover damages in a case like this.''

Jump to full article »

• 73 Gallup Poll Reveals Few Smokers Aware of Surgeon General's Warning 

This four-page document, "A Review of Awareness of the Surgeon General's Warning by Brand", is a survey doneforPhilip Morris, Inc. by the polling firm of Gallup & Robinson in 1973 to gaugepublic awareness of the U.S. Surgeon General's warning about the health hazards of smoking. The document was one of over 250,000 that Philip Morris was allowed to keep confidential following the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement . .

An article in an AP Wire Service/New York article of February 6, 2003 (Judge Allows Survey in Smoker Trial) about the Sylvia Allen case currently ongoing in Miami, Florida, reported that this document had been admitted to evidence in that case. . .

The survey shows that only 3.1% of smokers were aware of the Surgeon General's health warning about the dangers of smoking at that time.   An average of only 5.7% of the total sampled population were aware of the warnings. The survey is significant because of the frequent tobacco industry claim that knowledge of  government warnings about the dangers of of smoking was widespread at that time. This survey shows that awareness of government health warnings in reality was actually very low, and even lower among smokers than in the overall population.

Jump to full article »

The survey is significant because of the frequent tobacco industry claim that knowledge of  government warnings about the dangers of smoking was widespread at that time. This survey shows that awareness of government health warnings in reality was actually very low, and even lower among smokers than in the overall population.
Anne Landman