Tobacco.org

• Jury awards punitive damages to smoker's daughter 

A jury on Monday recommended that cigarette maker Philip Morris USA should pay $13.8 million in punitive damages to the daughter of a longtime smoker who died of lung cancer.

The panel voted 9-3 in favor of Bullock's daughter Jodie Bullock, who is now the plaintiff in the case. Betty Bullock died of lung cancer in February 2003. She had sued Philip Morris in April 2001, accusing the company of fraud and product liability. A jury in 2002 recommended Philip Morris pay a record $28 billion in punitive damages to Bullock, but a judge later reduced the award to $28 million.

In 2008, the 2nd District Court of Appeal reversed the jury's decision and remanded the case for a new trial over the punitive damages. Philip Morris said the $28 million remained excessive.

However, the original jury recommended the tobacco company pay Bullock $750,000 in damages and $100,000 for pain and suffering, a verdict that still stands.

In a statement, Richmond, Virginia-based Altria Group Inc., which owns Philip Morris, said any amount given to Bullock's daughter is unwarranted. . . .

Plaintiff's attorney Michael Piuze said the jury's verdict amounted to a "slap on the wrist for Philip Morris."

"I liked it better when it was $28 billion," said Piuze, who represented Betty Bullock after she filed the lawsuit. "She wanted me to beat the crap out of Philip Morris, and we did it once."

Jump to full article »

• The Bloom Is Off the Rose for Tobacco Claims 

Last month, a Los Angeles jury awarded $13.8 million in punitive damages to the daughter of Betty Bullock, a smoker who had sued Philip Morris USA Inc. before she died of cancer. It was a huge loss -- for the plaintiff.

Just seven years before, a different jury in the same case had awarded a record $28 billion in punitives. Philip Morris appealed that blow, and eventually a California appellate court ordered a retrial, leading to the much diminished result of Aug. 24.

What happened between 2002 and last month? Bullock's lawyer, Los Angeles solo practitioner Michael Piuze, did not return calls seeking comment. But Charles Tauman, president of the plaintiff-friendly Tobacco Trial Lawyers' Association, said he had spoken to Piuze, who "felt that the jury that he had was of a different character than the one ... in the original Bullock case. He felt they were harsher and less willing to be sympathetic."

Lawyers on both sides of smoker cases say Piuze's experience is unique only in the magnitude of the lost award. Hard statistics on recent personal injury lawsuits against tobacco companies are difficult to come by, but the anecdotal evidence about punitive damages is growing. Jurors today are less willing to impose severe punishment than jurors just a decade ago.

Lawyers point to changed practices and fading memories, as well as limits on punitives imposed by the U.S. Supreme Court. The major tobacco companies altered their marketing practices following the 1998 master settlement agreement with most states. Younger jurors never knew or retain only dim memories of an era when cigarette packages didn't feature dire health warnings and tobacco executives played down the dangers of their products.

"They're not the evil empire anymore," said Madelyn Chaber . . .

By the time Chaber retried that case in 2007, she found herself in what she called "an entirely different world." Jurors voted for just $250,000 in punitive damages against R.J. Reynolds and rejected punitives against Philip Morris.

"The jury was basically: 'This is old news -- we've heard this and everybody knows it's dangerous,' " Chaber said.

Also, Philip Morris (now part of Altria Group Inc.) is a "changed company," said Murray Garnick

Jump to full article »

Daughter of lung cancer victim wins $13.8m from U.S. tobacco company Philip Morris  

Betty Bullock started smoking Marlboros when she was just 17 and died of lung cancer aged 64

A U.S. jury has ordered cigarette maker Philip Morris to pay $13.8million (�8.4m) to the daughter of a long term smoker who died of lung cancer.

The jury in Los Angeles voted in favour of Jodie Bullock, the daughter of Betty Bullock who died of lung cancer in 2003 aged 64.

Jump to full article »

Tobacco Company Dodges $28 Billion Bullet, Slapped With $13 Million in Punitive Damages 

A Los Angeles jury awarded $13.8 million in punitive damages against Philip Morris USA on Monday in the retrial of a case that originally netted a record $28 billion to a lifetime smoker.

"After hearing weeks of improper arguments and evidence that violated state and federal law on punitive damages, the jury still managed to reject plaintiff's patently unreasonable request," said Murray Garnick, senior vice president and associate general counsel at Altria Group Inc., parent corporation of Philip Morris. The company released a statement soon after the verdict: "California jury rejects request for billions in damages."

"Even so," Garnick continued, "we believe that any punitive damages award is unwarranted based on the facts in this case and that this award is unconstitutionally excessive."

Jump to full article »

Turia welcomes decision to prosecute tobacco firm 

Tariana Turia has described the daughter of a long-time smoker as “courageous” for winning a case against a tobacco giant.

This week, a federal jury in the United States decided cigarette maker Philip Morris USA should pay US$13.8 million in punitive damages to Jodie Bullock whose mother Betty Bullock died of lung cancer in 2003.

“My hat goes off to Jodie – she’s absolutely courageous and it’s about time tobacco companies were forced to acknowledge that their products not only affect those who smoke them, but also their children.”

Jump to full article »

REZAEE: Smokers need to take responsibility for their own habitat 

The daughter of a deceased smoker just earned some easy money after a jury in Los Angeles decided that Philip Morris owes her $13.8 million in punitive damages. . . .

These frivolous cases has at times allowed one freeloader to mooch off a major industry and a dying relative. In this age every one is aware of the harmful effects of smoking. The only excuse one person could have is their inability to read the warning, hence they should be ashamed of themselves.

Half these moronic claims state that it was the tobacco industries fault for having them smoke in the first place. One problem in the anti-smoking debate is their is no personal responsibility, its always scapegoating the industry.

I'm a smoker (Lucky Strike), I have smoked one pack a week since I was 17, I'm aware of the effects it has on my health, I avoid smoking in areas were children are present, and I could read the label that says "Surgeon General Warning: smoking will give you cancer and it will kill you".

If I die it would be my fault for smoking not the tobacco company.

Jump to full article »

Altria Must Pay $13.8 Million in Smoker Lawsuit, Jury Says  

Altria Group Inc., parent company of Philip Morris USA, the Marlboro cigarette maker, must pay $13.8 million in punitive damages to the daughter of a lifelong smoker who died of lung cancer in 2003, a jury found.

The verdict for Jodie Bullock, daughter of Betty Bullock, who smoked Marlboro and Benson & Hedges cigarettes for 45 years, was reached yesterday in Los Angeles. An earlier award of $28 billion from a 2002 trial had been first reduced by the trial judge and then canceled by an appeals court that ordered a new trial on punitive damages.

Bullock’s lawyer, Michael Piuze, told jurors Philip Morris misrepresented the risks of smoking for 50 years. He asked for “billions” in punitive damages, saying that anything less wouldn’t punish the company. Altria, the largest U.S. cigarette maker, reported 2008 sales of $19.4 billion.

Jump to full article »

• Jury awards punitive damages to smoker's daughter 

A jury on Monday recommended that cigarette maker Philip Morris USA should pay $13.8 million in punitive damages to the daughter of a longtime smoker who died of lung cancer.

The panel voted 9-3 in favor of Bullock's daughter Jodie Bullock, who is now the plaintiff in the case. Betty Bullock died of lung cancer in February 2003.

She had sued Philip Morris in April 2001, accusing the company of fraud and product liability. A jury in 2002 recommended Philip Morris pay a record $28 billion in punitive damages to Bullock, but a judge later reduced the award to $28 million.

In 2008, the 2nd U.S. District Court of Appeal reversed the jury's decision and remanded the case for a new trial over the punitive damages. Philip Morris said the $28 million remained excessive.

However, the original jury recommended the tobacco company pay Bullock $750,000 in damages and $100,000 for pain and suffering, a verdict that still stands. . . .

"After hearing weeks of improper arguments and evidence that violated state and federal law on punitive damages, the jury still managed to reject plaintiff's patently unreasonable request," said Murray Garnick, Altria Client Services senior vice president, speaking on behalf of Philip Morris. "Even so, we believe that any punitive damages award is unwarranted based on the facts in this case and that this award is unconstitutionally excessive."

Jump to full article »

After hearing weeks of improper arguments and evidence that violated state and federal law on punitive damages, the jury still managed to reject plaintiff's patently unreasonable request. Even so, we believe that any punitive damages award is unwarranted based on the facts in this case and that this award is unconstitutionally excessive.
Murray Garnick, Altria Client Services senior vice president, speaking on behalf of Philip Morris, on the $13.8 M Bullock judgment.

Some of us looked at it as an opportunity to deter this behavior. I don't find $13.8 million to be much of a deterrent.
Matt Reed, 37, of Burbank one of the three dissenting Bullock jurors, who believed Philip Morris should pay a higher amount than the verdict.

Three pending cases involving application of Philip Morris v. Williams 

In Bullock, the court of appeal took the unusual step of inviting the parties to submit names of amici who might be interested in submitting briefs. After receiving lists from both parties, the court invited and received a wide range of amicus briefs on the effect of Williams. Copies of the briefing can be found at this link.

In the interests of full disclosure, we should mention that the authors of this blog are counsel of record for Unocal in the Holdgrafer appeal and we have an attorney-client relationship with Philip Morris.

Jump to full article »

Docket (Register of Actions): Bullock et al. v. Philip Morris USA Inc.  

12/27/2007 Filed letter from: Letter response (dtd 12/20/07) of Philip Morris USA Inc. in response to plaintiff's letter of 12/14/07. (Filed with permission of the Court.) PK

01/30/2008 Opinion filed. (Signed Published)

Jump to full article »

• BULLOCK v. PHILIP MORRIS (PDF) 

We conclude that Philip Morris has shown no error with respect to its liability for fraud and products liability, but that the refusal of Philip Morris’s proposed instruction not to impose punishment for harm caused to nonparties to the litigation was error. We therefore affirm the judgment as to the finding of liability, the award of compensatory damages, and the finding that Philip Morris was guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice, and reverse the judgment as to the amount of punitive damages, with directions to conduct a new trial limited to determining that issue. We also hold that the court had no authority to award attorney fees as a sanction against Piuze and reverse the sanctions order.

Jump to full article »

Rationale of Oregon Supreme Court decision in Williams should not apply in California 

The Oregon Supreme Court concluded that the trial court had an adequate basis under state law for refusing to instruct the jury that "you are not to punish the defendant for the impact of its alleged misconduct on other persons." The U.S. Supreme Court had held that a defendant is entitled to due process protections such as are reflected in this sort of instruction upon request, but the Oregon Supreme Court said the trial court properly refused the proposed instruction in this case because it included other language, some of which was erroneous under Oregon state law. Apparently, under Oregon law, a trial court can refuse a party's request for an instruction that correctly sets forth relevant principles of law - even principles essential to ensuring constitutional rights - if the proposed instruction is bundled with other language that is incorrect. The same reasoning would not apply in California. California courts have held that, even when a proposed jury instruction is flawed, if the subject matter of the instruction is "vital" or "material" to the case and not covered by other instructions, the trial court is required to give a proper instruction that captures the substance of the law.

Jump to full article »

• Case Information: Bullock v. PM USA, Inc. 

After the Williams case was decided, the California Supreme Court remanded the case for further proceedings in light of Williams. (Click here to read briefing and articles related to the : Philip Morris USA v. Mayola Williams case decided by the United States Supreme Court on February 20, 2007.) The Court of Appeal then ordered supplemental briefing, which was followed by an order inviting answers from the parties and assorted amici curiae to three questions regarding implementation of the Williams decision. All briefing is completed, and oral argument took place on December 12, 2007. The Court of Appeal issued its opinion on January 30, 2008. (Click here to read the opinion.)

Jump to full article »

• Bullock v. Philip Morris - - California Court of Appeal reverses $28 million punitive damages award 

We blogged here about this pending appeal involving the intersection of California law and the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Philip Morris v. Williams. This afternoon, the Court of Appeal (the Second Appellate District, Division Three) issued a published opinion reversing the $28 million punitive damages award and remanding the case for a new trial on the amount of punitive damages. The same court had previously approved the $28 million award, but the U.S. Supreme Court vacated that decision and remanded for reconsideration in light of Williams. . . .

here's the Court of Appeal's summary of its disposition:

"We conclude that Philip Morris has shown no error with respect to its liability for fraud and products liability, but that the refusal of Philip Morris's proposed instruction not to impose punishment for harm caused to nonparties to the litigation was error. We therefore affirm the judgment as to the finding of liability, the award of compensatory damages, and the finding that Philip Morris was guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice, and reverse the judgment as to the amount of punitive damages, with directions to conduct a new trial limited to determining that issue."

Jump to full article »

• Calif. Supremes Wait for Smoke to Clear Over Punitive Damages ($$) 

If the U.S. Supreme Court can provide guidance, why not let it?

On Wednesday, at the urging of tobacco giant Philip Morris USA Inc., the California Supreme Court put on hold a major punitive damages case to await a ruling by the nation's highest court on identical issues.

The state court's 6-0 vote freezes for now an April 21 appellate court ruling that OK'd a $28 million punitive damages award against Virginia-based Philip Morris -- an amount 33 times greater than the compensatory damages in the case. . . .

Philip Morris' attorneys at Arnold & Porter want the punitive damages reduced or dismissed, but asked the California Supreme Court to await the findings of the federal court in Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Williams, 05-1256.

The higher court granted certiorari on May 30 to decide whether the Oregon Supreme Court was justified in affirming an award of $79.5 million in punitive damages to a longtime smoker, which was about 100 times the compensatory damages. . . .

Both the Oregon court and Los Angeles' 2nd District Court of Appeal in the California case had found the tobacco manufacturer's conduct so reprehensible that it justified punitive damages in excess of a single-digit ratio.

In both cases, 45-year smokers Jesse Williams of Oregon and Betty Bullock of California died of lung cancer.

Jump to full article »