Tobacco.org

• Three jurors, four alternates off panel in tobacco class-action case 

The state Supreme Court ordered the removal of three jurors and four alternate jurors from the panel that will decide a major class-action lawsuit against tobacco companies.

The lawsuit alleges that the tobacco industry manipulated nicotine levels to keep smokers hooked.

Tuesday's decision was at once a partial victory and a setback for the tobacco companies, who had argued that 12 jurors and alternates were too biased to decide the case because they had relatives who smoke or have smoked.

Those parents, spouses or siblings could qualify for industry-paid quit-smoking programs and medical monitoring if the smokers win the case.

But most of the seven Supreme Court judges hearing the case sided largely with plaintiff lawyers who said the issue was whether those jurors could make a fair decision, regardless of whether their relatives would benefit.

"We are convinced there is no legislative or jurisprudential support for defendants' position that all jurors with family members who are potential class members must be excluded from the jury," the unsigned majority opinion said. . .

Tuesday's decision, along with an earlier appeal court ruling tossing off other jurors, means four remaining alternate jurors will join the jury panel and more alternates will have to be selected before opening arguments can begin. . .

In the unsigned plurality opinion issued Tuesday, the court assessed the ability of each of the 12 to make a fair decision. For instance, the court noted that Juror No. 1 had told the court he once asked his mother and brother if they wanted to quit smoking, that he himself had once smoked and that he was unsure whether he would consider participating in a quit-smoking program.

His overall responses indicated he could be influenced by the availability of such programs and should have been thrown off the jury, the court said.

On the other hand, Juror No. 2, whose father was a former smoker, gave answers indicating she had not formed opinions that would affect her impartiality, the court said. . .

The suit is expected to take up to a year to try.

Jump to full article »

• High court orders jurors replaced / They have relatives who smoke tobacco 

The Louisiana Supreme Court on Tuesday told the judge in a pending class action lawsuit against three of the nation's big tobacco companies to replace four jurors and five alternates, saying the verdict could be swayed by their desire for close relatives to get free medical tests.

There was no immediate word about when Civil District Court Judge Richard Ganucheau would pick new jurors. Five of the court's seven justices agreed the trial could not proceed without new jurors; two of the justices said even more jurors and alternates should have been stricken from the case. . .

The justices said Ganucheau erred by not dismissing three of 12 jurors and four of 10 alternates who, despite claiming they could be fair, indicated they would like to see their immediate relatives get help to stop smoking and annual health testing or gave other reasons to believe those relationships might affect their verdict. The court instructed Ganucheau to replace not only those jurors and alternates, but also the juror and alternate the appeals court said should not have been seated.

The Supreme Court told Ganucheau to shift four existing alternates to the jury. After dismissing the five alternates, that leaves only one person on the original slate of alternates. The judge then must hold hearings to pick nine new alternate jurors, building that panel back up to ten, the court said.

The number of separate opinions emerging from the court Tuesday, six, illustrated sharp disagreement among the justices. . .

Associate Justice Jeffrey Victory and Jeannette Theriot Knoll concurred, but in strongly worded dissents they decried the practice of allowing people to serve as jurors in cases affecting their relatives. They would have struck all jurors and alternates with immediate family members who are potential members of the class, including four additional jurors and one more alternate.

Jump to full article »

When you look at the parameters of the class, every citizen in Louisiana, including judges, are potential members of the class, as virtually everyone is connected in some fashion to a smoker or former smoker.
Louisiana Supreme Court Associate Justice Bernette Johnson, in her dissent from the majority's decision which forces the Scott case judge to replace four jurors and five alternates. The court decided the verdict could be swayed by their desire for close relatives to get free medical tests. Finch, S.

• Law professor's remarks violated gag order, tobacco lawyer says  

Whether published remarks by a Boston attorney for the plaintiffs in a statewide class-action lawsuit against the nation's largest tobacco companies justify scuttling the trial before it begins was one of the debates at a Monday hearing in Orleans Parish Civil District Court.

Philip Morris attorney Phil Wittmann told Civil District Judge Richard Ganucheau that Northeastern University School of Law professor Richard Daynard's comments in a Sept. 4 story in The Times-Picayune were prejudicial to the defense and violated the judge's August order barring both sides from speaking with reporters.

Daynard heads his law school's Tobacco Products Liability Project, which encourages lawsuits against tobacco companies as a public health strategy.

The gag order, which tobacco companies say is unconstitutional, is among several issues pending. The trial, which was to start Sept. 5, has been put on hold while various courts consider them.

The Louisiana Supreme Court is still reviewing whether to order Ganucheau to pick new jurors in the case

Jump to full article »

Arguments in tobacco trial postponed 

Arguments were put off today before the Louisiana Supreme Court over how jurors were selected for a statwide class-action suit seeking to make the tobacco industry pay for quit-smoking programs and medical monitoring for smokers.

A day after terrorist attacks in Washington and New York, the high court's building was open, with state troopers added to the court's usual security force. The justices tentatively re-scheduled the arguments for Thursday.

At issue is an appellate court order that tossed off one juror and one alternate juror in the case, which is expected to take up to a year to try.

Jump to full article »

• In Wake of Bombings, Courts Seek Return to Normal (Update1) 

Judges in West Virginia and Louisiana delayed lawsuits that seek to force U.S. tobacco companies to pay for regular health check-ups for smokers.

A judge in Wheeling, West Virginia, postponed a class-action trial against Philip Morris Cos., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Holdings Inc. and other cigarette makers until Monday at the lawyers' request. In New Orleans, the Louisiana Supreme Court postponed arguments, scheduled for today, on whether some jurors were properly removed from a similar tobacco lawsuit in that state. [This graph only]

Jump to full article »

• Jury selection battle delays start of Louisiana tobacco trial  

The state Supreme Court will hear arguments next week in a jury selection battle that delayed trial in a class-action lawsuit against the tobacco industry.

Trial was to have begun this past Wednesday in a lawsuit alleging that the tobacco industry manipulated nicotine levels to keep smokers hooked. However, the day before the trial, a state appeal court tossed off a juror and an alternate.

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeal in New Orleans said the two disqualified jurors should not have been seated because they indicated bias against the tobacco industry.

The people who filed the lawsuit appealed that decision to the Louisiana Supreme Court. Meanwhile, defense lawyers for the tobacco companies asked the high court to remove the entire panel and declare a mistrial.

The defense said several prospective jurors had immediate family members who are prospective members of the class represented by the suit's plaintiffs.

Jump to full article »

• Big tobacco companies' claim of juror bias pushes trial back 

The Louisiana Supreme Court will hold a hearing Wednesday on whether the jury in the upcoming trial of a statewide class-action lawsuit against the nation's big tobacco companies should include people whose close relatives are healthy smokers or former smokers.

The question was brought to the high court this week by attorneys for Big Tobacco.

They claim it would be unfair for the case to be decided by individuals whose parents, siblings, spouses or children could qualify for the relief the suit seeks: programs to help them stop smoking and annual testing to detect lung cancer, bladder cancer, heart disease and emphysema.

A six-month-to-yearlong trial of the case before Civil District Judge Richard Ganucheau was to have begun Wednesday but was postponed after three judges of the state 4th Circuit Court of Appeal told Ganucheau to replace one juror and one alternate juror it said were biased against the tobacco companies.

Two other 4th Circuit judges who considered the matter agreed those two jurors should be removed but said Ganucheau should replace all 13 jurors and alternate jurors whose immediate relatives could be part of the plaintiffs' class.

The tobacco companies have asked the Supreme Court to require Ganucheau to come up with a completely new set of jurors and alternate jurors.

Jump to full article »

Juror, alternate ouster delays La. tobacco trial 

A fight over jurors selected to hear a statewide class-action suit against the tobacco industry delayed the start of opening statements and testimony Wednesday. . .

Civil District Judge Richard Ganucheau said he would call potential jurors who filled out a questionnaire for service in the case but have not been interviewed by attorneys. He set a hearing for Monday and plans to have attorneys select at least two replacements, depending on how the Supreme Court rules. There was no indication of when the Supreme Court would act.

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeal said the disqualified jurors should not have been seated because they indicated bias against the tobacco industry.

Attorneys would not comment, citing a gag order imposed by the judge.

Jump to full article »

• Jurors picked for tobacco trial 

Jurors will hear opening statements Monday in a lawsuit aimed at forcing the tobacco industry to provide free, annual medical monitoring to healthy West Virginia smokers.

The pool of potential jurors was whittled to 19 Thursday afternoon, and lawyers were making their final cuts late in the day to get a panel of six with four alternates, Ohio County Circuit Clerk Brenda Miller said.

Jurors will have a day off Friday and begin hearing what could be months of testimony at 8:30 a.m. Monday.

Jump to full article »

• Court orders tobacco suit jurors replaced 

A state appeals court ruled Tuesday that a juror and an alternate juror must be replaced in the trial of a lawsuit that claims tobacco companies manipulated nicotine levels in cigarettes to keep Louisiana smokers addicted.

It was not immediately clear how the 4th Circuit Court of Appeal ruling will affect Civil District Court Judge Richard Ganucheau's intention to have attorneys give their opening statements today in a case expected to take six months to a year to complete.

Meanwhile, the tobacco firms, who had asked the 4th Circuit to order selection of a whole new set of 12 jurors and eight alternate jurors, could take their request to the Louisiana Supreme Court. . .

Earlier Tuesday, Ganucheau heard arguments on several defense motions but made no immediate decisions on any of them.

One was a request by the tobacco companies for Ganucheau to lift his Aug. 13 order forbidding lawyers and parties in the case from talking to the news media.

The tobacco attorneys contend that the gag order would prevent their clients from answering claims voiced by anti-tobacco forces outside the trial. But the plaintiffs' lawyers argued it will stop those involved in the case from making out-of-court statements that might influence the jury.

Another request, this one from Philip Morris, asked Ganucheau to forbid any reference in the trial to a controversial study commissioned this summer by the company's Czech affiliate.

Jump to full article »

• Louisiana tobacco trial delayed to replace jurors 

Tuesday the Louisiana 4th Circuit Court of Appeal ordered two jurors to be replaced on grounds that they are related to people who could benefit if the plaintiffs won their case.

State Civil District Court Judge Richard Ganucheau said the trial will be in recess until Monday Sept. 10, when attorneys for both sides will begin selecting two new jurors.

Meanwhile the Louisiana Supreme Court is considering a broader challenge by tobacco company attorneys to the impartiality of jurors, which could lead to further delays.

Ganucheau said on Wednesday he had been ``a little overwhelmed'' by a ``blizzard'' of pretrial motions filed by defense attorneys this week.

``At some point, this has to stop and we have to start calling witnesses,'' he said.

Jump to full article »

Louisiana Tobacco Trial Delayed After Jurors Removed (Update1) 

Two jurors accused of bias against the tobacco industry were removed from the trial of a Louisiana smokers' lawsuit, delaying opening arguments in the class-action case at least until next week.

A Louisiana appeals court disqualified one juror and one alternate, overruling trial Judge Richard Ganucheau. Plaintiffs' lawyers Russ Herman said he will appeal to the state Supreme Court to reinstate the jurors.

Ganucheau ordered lawyers to begin selecting replacement jurors Monday, leaving it unclear when opening statements will start. It took about one month to select the panel of 12 jurors and eight alternates. Nine of the 12 must agree to reach a verdict. . .

The dismissed juror said during questioning by lawyers selecting the panel that she would like to see the tobacco companies go out of business, according to the appeals court decision.

``She further states she could not put aside her feelings against the tobacco companies and judge the case fairly on the merits, because, `I don't think they have any merits,' '' the appeals court quoted her as saying. . .

The alternate who was dismissed has a mother who has chest pains that could be related to smoking. ``She admitted on her questionnaire that she thought the tobacco companies should be punished,'' the appeals court said.

The court said Ganucheau abused his discretion when he refused to remove the jurors from the case.

Jump to full article »

Tobacco Industry Faces Trial in Louisiana Lawsuit (Update1) 

The tobacco industry begins defending itself tomorrow against a class-action lawsuit that seeks to force companies to pay for Louisiana smokers' medical checkups.

The case, which begins with opening statements before a state court jury in New Orleans, demands that tobacco companies finance a 25-year program of medical-monitoring tests and pay to help Louisiana smokers quit.

If successful, smokers may bring similar claims across the country, legal experts have said. Lawyers in a similar suit in state court in Wheeling, West Virginia, begin selecting a jury tomorrow. Opening statements in that case are expected next week.

Jump to full article »

• Suit: Force tobacco companies to provide free health screenings 

A landmark lawsuit to force the tobacco industry to give healthy smokers free annual medical tests is a potential mine field for the dozens of witnesses expected to testify.

Jury selection starts Wednesday in the class-action case, which has been carefully restructured since a mistrial was declared in January.

The lawsuit targets four of the nation's largest tobacco companies -- R.J. Reynolds, Philip Morris, Brown & Williamson and Lorillard -- and covers some 250,000 West Virginians. The class includes people who have smoked the equivalent of a pack a day for five years, but who are not yet sick.

Smokers who have already become ill are pursuing a separate personal injury case, and class members who later become sick can do the same.

As in the first medical monitoring trial, there are subjects that are off limits to lawyers and witnesses. They include the ''C words:'' cessation, compensation and choice. The mention of any one could derail the trial and lead to decertification of the class.

Lawyers and witnesses must focus on issues that are common to all smokers, Ohio County Circuit Judge Arthur Recht has ruled. They must also address the conduct of the tobacco companies, not the conduct of the smokers.

''We are in somewhat of a thicket created by the desire to proceed as a class,'' Recht said.

Tobacco company attorneys, for example, can talk about addiction and suggest that people should quit smoking to stay healthy, but neither the lawyers nor the witnesses may discuss whether smokers are capable of quitting. . .

A class-action medical monitoring case in Louisiana is expected to go to trial soon, but it differs from West Virginia's, which seeks only medical monitoring. Louisiana smokers also want the tobacco companies to help them quit.

While West Virginia's trial is expected to end by January, the Louisiana case could last a year.

Jump to full article »

Judge Issues Tobacco Suit Gag Order 

Judge Richard J. Ganucheau said in his ruling Monday that statements outside the court ``may very well prejudice the parties to this matter.''

The civil lawsuit, filed by Louisiana on behalf of Gloria Scott, seeks to force cigarette makers to pay for a program aimed at helping smokers quit and another to monitor smokers' health.

Ganucheau's order did not indicate who sought the gag order and Dominic Gianna, a special master in the case, said that matter was not public record.

An American Lung Association official who has been following the case said he was suprised by the order, which is rare in tobacco cases.

``I don't think you can infect a jury pool because anyone who's been conscious knows what the issues are,'' said Ben Fontaine, the Louisiana director for the American Lung Associacation, which support the plaintiffs in the case.

Jump to full article »