Email
Password
(Forgot Password?)
37. As a direct and proximate result of smoking cigarettes manufactured and sold by one or more Defendants, Plaintiff suffered from one or more of the diseases and medical
6
conditions described, including emphysema/COPD, which was caused by her addiction to cigarettes that contain nicotine and each of which manifested during the class period.
COUNT I: STRICT LIABILITY . . .
COUNT II: FRAUD BY CONCEALMENT . . .
COUNT III: CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT FRAUD BY CONCEALMENT . . .
COUNT IV: NEGLIGENCE . . .
COUNT V: BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRANTY . . .
COUNT VI: BREACH OF IMPLIED WARRANTY
Jump to full article »
Philip Morris USA said today it will seek further review of a jury verdict awarding approximately $56 million in compensatory damages and $244 million in punitive damages.
The verdict came in the trial of a so-called Engle case following a 2006 Supreme Court decision that decertified a class action but allowed former class members to file individual lawsuits.
"From the beginning, this case was marked by a fundamentally unfair and unconstitutional trial plan that allowed the jury to rely on findings by a prior jury that have no connection to the plaintiff," said Murray Garnick, Altria Client Services senior vice president and associate general counsel, speaking on behalf of Philip Morris USA.
"Today's verdict was the result of numerous erroneous rulings by the trial judge that allowed the jury to hear extensive evidence totally unrelated to the individual smoker
Judge Stan Griffis stays busy presiding over cases that involve family issues, probate and other non-felony civil matters, but he says it’s the foreclosures that keep him tied up these days.
“Foreclosures are a staggering portion of my docket,” Griffis told Williston Rotary members last week. . . .
he will hear suits filed by eight individuals against the tobacco industry.
Originally a class action suit that was tried in Miami, Griffis said the case was overturned by the State Supreme Court, which also declassified the lawsuit, putting it back into the hands of the individual plaintiffs.
Now those individuals have refiled the suits and they will be heard here.
What that means for Levy residents, Griffis said, is the high probability of being selected to be on the juries that hear the cases.
Each case is expected to last three weeks, the judge said, and senior judges will more than likely pick up his regular docket while he is occupied with the lengthy lawsuits.
While Levy County has eight such suits, Alachua has 70, he said.
In the latest individual tobacco case to make it to trial in Florida, a six-person jury in Ft. Lauderdale awarded a 92-year-old man $5.3 million for his wife’s death from smoking.
The case was the eighth Engle case to make it to trial, and the sixth victory for the plaintiffs.
Shirley Barbanell died as a result of a smoking about two packs a day for more than 40 years, said her husband’s attorney, Steven J. Hammer, a partner at the Schlesinger Law Firm in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.
The verdict – which does not include punitive damages – will be apportioned for fault. Jurors awarded 63.5 percent of the fault to Barbanell and 36.5 percent to Philip Morris, reducing the verdict to just under $2 million.
Shirley’s husband, Leon, turned 92 on the day he testified at trial about his wife. He told jurors he still talks to her every night since her death in 1996.
He also testified that he and Shirley watched in 1994 as tobacco executives testified before Congress, swearing that their product wasn’t addictive. Shirley had already been diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease by that point and turned to Leon and told him the executives were lying.
She added, “If anything happens to me, you have to sue them for what they did to me,” Hammer said. . . .
While Hammer acknowledged that his client’s wife bore some responsibility by continuing to smoke, he said the biggest obstacle at trial was presenting to the jury how differently smoking was treated during the majority of Shirley’s life as compared to today.
“Part of the difficulty with [the Engle cases] is that most people have been exposed to all the bad that tobacco does to the human body and are so removed from the time when everyone smoked,” he explained. “It’s difficult for a younger person to grasp that we live in a different world today and they think smokers have a larger share of the fault.”
Fifteen years after a Miami Beach pediatrician suffering lung disease took on the tobacco giants, thousands of smokers' lawsuits are working their way through Florida courts and early results encourage both sides.
There have been nine verdicts in a massive block of litigation known in the industry as "Engle progeny," the offspring of a landmark 1994 lawsuit filed by Dr. Howard Engle that produced a $145 billion judgment against cigarette makers six years later.
It was the first class-action brought by sick smokers to make it to trial and the largest civil damage award in U.S. history. The judgment was overturned on appeal, but the multimillion dollar litigation industry spawned by that lawsuit could thrive for years in Florida.
The scorecard: seven judgments for smokers and their families, ranging from $600,000 to $30 million; two wins for tobacco firms.
"I think we've seen that these cases are winnable," lawyer Jonathan Gdanski said after winning a $1.9 million judgment last week in Broward County. . . .
Lawyers are scheduled on September 17 to make arguments before the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta on an important facet of the Engle litigation.
When the Florida Supreme Court rejected the $145 billion award in 2006, it left intact some critical findings of the trial court -- that smoking causes diseases, that nicotine is addictive, that cigarettes are defective and dangerous and that tobacco companies concealed the health effects of smoking.
The ruling was supposed to let smokers try their individual cases without having to prove those elements again, making it easier and cheaper for them to take on costly court battles.
A court in Jacksonville rejected the use of those findings, putting thousands of federal lawsuits on hold. An adverse ruling for smokers, while not binding on state courts, could have a chilling effect on those cases, lawyers say. . . .
But if the first results are an indication, the lawsuits are unlikely to impede profitability.
A Broward Circuit Court jury awarded $1.93 million Thursday to the husband of a woman who smoked two packs of cigarettes a day for more than 40 years. The Florida jury deliberated for more than eight hours before handing down the verdict for Leon Barbanell, 92, who sued on behalf of his late wife, Shirley. The Marlboro smoker started smoking when she was 16 and died from lung cancer in 1996 at 73.
"No amount of money would bring back his wife," said the widower's attorney, Jonathan Gdanski of the Law Offices of Sheldon J. Schlesinger in Fort Lauderdale. "He's suffered tremendously as a result of her passing, and he's entitled to be compensated for her premature death."
Murray Garnick, Altria Client Services associate general counsel, issued a statement on behalf of Marlboro maker Philip Morris saying the verdict was "the result of a severely prejudicial trial plan" and the company will appeal.
Gdanski filed suit against Philip Morris, alleging the tobacco company negligently concealed facts about the dangers of smoking.
"Philip Morris denied she had lung cancer, denied she died from it and denied she was addicted to it," Gdanski said in a telephone interview
A Florida jury awarded a 92-year-old man $1.9 million in compensatory damages for the death of his wife, a former two-pack-a-day Marlboro smoker who started when she was 16 and died in her 70s, attorneys said Thursday.
The jury of five women and one man deliberated for slightly more than a day before awarding a total of $5.3 million and finding Philip Morris USA 36.5 percent responsible for the lung cancer that plaintiffs said killed Leon Barbanell's wife, Shirley, attorneys for both sides said.
Shirley Barbanell herself was deemed 63.5 percent responsible.
Plaintiff's attorney Jonathan Gdanski said the jury found a design defect and a breach of warranty.
Description:Engle Progeny tobacco liability jury trial in Broward County Circuit Court's complex litigation division.
Trial - 07/27/09
Case Number:07-36737
Status:In Progress . . .
Judge:
Streitfeld, Jeffrey
Witnesses:
Expert
* Kyriakoudes, Prof. Louis Lay
* Barbanell, Mr. Leon
Bullock was among the roughly four in 10 smokers who succeeded in getting a case against Henrico County-based Philip Morris USA into court and winning. Most lose on appeal, but Bullock's case still has legs, though not as the $28 billion case it once was.
Six years after her victory, and five after she succumbed to cancer, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in another Philip Morris case is sending the question of how much to punish the company back to a Los Angeles courtroom.
Not so long ago, it seemed as if the future of the tobacco industry and the tens of thousands it employs in Virginia and across the South could be decided by a multibillion-dollar verdict in any one of a score of court cases.
Now, it's not so clear.
"We continued to see a decline in the number of traditional smoking and health cases in 2008," said Murray Garnick, a senior vice president and associate general counsel at Altria Group, the Henrico County-based company that owns Philip Morris USA. "In fact, last year no [health-related] tobacco case was tried to verdict against any U.S. cigarette manufacturer." , , ,
The one kind of case that is growing alleges Philip Morris defrauded smokers by selling "low-tar" and "lights" cigarettes, fooling them into thinking they got something they weren't. These cases aren't seeking damages for harm to health; instead, they're alleging misrepresentation that caused smokers to pay too much for their cigarettes.
The number of these so-called "lights" cases, which has jumped from 17 at the end of last year to 27 as of May -- is still less than a third of the cases alleging damages to health. Courts have rejected many of the cases, and none has reached a final disposition in favor of the plaintiffs.
Philip Morris argues the cases don't make sense, since a claim for economic damages -- basically paying too much -- doesn't make sense if the prices of "lights" and other cigarettes were the same.
Dr. Howard A. Engle, the veteran Miami Beach pediatrician who lent his name to a landmark class action suit against Big Tobacco, died Wednesday at home, said son David Engle. He was 89 and suffered from smoking-related respiratory disease and lymphoma.
He had been in hospice care since last fall -- when he finally quit smoking.
Decades before he signed on as lead plaintiff in what became known as the ``sick smokers of Florida'' suit, Engle was an institution in Miami Beach, where he treated multiple generations of many families before retiring from private practice in 1997.
He was also revered in Miami's black community for refusing to segregate his practice in the pre-civil rights era and for opening an office in Liberty City.
Famously gruff and forthright, Engle was nonetheless single-mindedly dedicated to his young patients.
``He treated all his patients as if they were his own kids,'' son David said. ``He'd stay up all night with a sick kid who was thought to be hopeless.''
Anyone who knew Howard Engle understood that he cared far more about his role as a doctor than as a litigant -- even though Engle, et al. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al, marked a seismic shift in the legal battle against a once-invincible industry. . . .
``Goddammit! I'm an addict!'' he growled to a Herald reporter in 2006, lighting a Marlboro Medium as he gasped and coughed.
Goddammit! I'm an addict!Dr. Howard A. Engle, the veteran Miami Beach pediatrician who lent his name to the landmark class action suit, in 2006. The revered pediatrician died Wednesday at 89.
But it's clear from a jury's ruling this week that tobacco manufacturers, particularly R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., are facing significantly higher potential awards than had been projected.
A jury in Pensacola, Fla., on Monday awarded $5 million in compensation damages and $25 million in punitive damages from Reynolds to the family of Benny Martin.
Reynolds said it will appeal the decision.
"It is our position that the trial proceedings were unconstitutional and otherwise inconsistent with law," Reynolds spokesman David Howard said. "We believe the verdict will ultimately be reversed on these and other grounds." . . .
Edward Sweda, a senior attorney for the Tobacco Products Liability Project in Boston, said he believes the $30 million jury award is another major blow to the tobacco industry.
"The unmistakable message from this jury is that the tobacco industry's reprehensible misconduct must not be minimized or excused," Sweda said.
A jury awarded $30 million to a Pensacola widow who won a lawsuit against tobacco giant R.J. Reynolds.
A six-person jury on Friday ruled in favor of Hilda Martin, the widow of Benny Martin, a longtime smoker who died of lung cancer in 1995.
Of the award, R.J. Reynolds was ordered Friday to pay $5 million as compensation to Martin. The remaining $25 million was awarded Monday as punitive damages, which a jury can award plaintiffs in civil cases to curb future misconduct by the defendant.
The jurors deliberated for about a hour Monday morning after hearing from attorneys for both parties. . . .
Circuit Judge Terry Terrell presided over the three-week trial in Pensacola, the first of what will be many tried in Northwest Florida and throughout the state.
Some 100 similar cases will be tried in the 1st Judicial Circuit of Florida, which includes Escambia, Santa Rosa, Okaloosa and Walton counties.
Description:Engle progeny tobacco trial in Tampa.
Trial - 04/08/09 to 04/29/09
Video View or Purchase Video
Case Number:07-CA-015071
Status:Concluded - Verdict
Courthouse:
Edgecomb Courthouse
Tampa , FL
13th Judicial Circuit of Florida
Barton, James
More than 8,000 sick smokers in Florida have sued the tobacco industry for misleading claims but on Tuesday two legislative committees pushed through bills that will cap how much the industry is required to set aside in the event it loses those cases.
The House Finance and Tax Council and the Senate Judiciary Committee passed similar bills that would shield Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco and Lorillard from having to post hefty bonds as they face an avalanche of lawsuits from smokers.
The measures would allow the three companies to set aside a total of no more than $100 million in bond money in order to appeal the verdicts. Under state law, when a company loses a lawsuit and wants to appeal, it must post a bond for the entire amount of the judgement.
Trial lawyers complained the measures will remove the financial incentive for the tobacco giants to pay their judgements or settle their cases. Instead, they said, it will encourage the companies to pursue endless appeals and delays designed to financially break plaintiffs or wait until they die.
Promoters of the bills -- House Finance and Tax Council chairwoman Ellyn Bogdanoff and Melbourne Republican Sen. Mike Haridopolos -- said the measure is needed to give the industry financial certainty, and to protect the state's annual $205 million payment by the tobacco companies as part of the landmark 1997 settlement with the industry.
"As far as I'm concerned, the plaintiffs are going to be paid," said Bogdanoff, R-Fort Lauderdale.
A Pinellas County jury today ruled in favor of Philip Morris USA in one of the first tobacco lawsuits following a 2006 Florida Supreme Court decision that decertified a class action but allowed former class members to file individual lawsuits.
“The jury reached the correct result and determined that the plaintiff failed to meet the criteria established by this particular court to prevail at trial,” said Murray Garnick, Altria Client Services senior vice president and associate general counsel, speaking on behalf of Philip Morris USA.
Garnick said that this case was the third case tried to verdict since the Florida Supreme Court’s decision which allowed former Engle class members to proceed by relying on findings by the former Engle jury. . . .
"The jury’s verdict in this case shows that Philip Morris USA still has powerful defenses in these cases even when the trial court misinterprets the Florida Supreme Court’s holding in Engle and allows the plaintiff to improperly rely on a prior jury’s findings that have no connection with the plaintiff,” added Garnick. “Philip Morris USA will vigorously defend each individual Engle progeny case that goes to trial. We continue to believe each plaintiff must prove the essential elements of their claims and that we continue to have very strong defenses to these type of cases,” said Garnick.
The case is Gelep v. RJ Reynolds and Philip Morris USA.