Email
Password
(Forgot Password?)
Cronan, a one-person operation, would be going up against the giants of tobacco defense. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., which manufactures the brand of cigarettes Steele preferred, was represented by Kansas City's Shook Hardy & Bacon and a Chicago firm. . . "It was a rewarding thing to do," he said. "They were very wonderful clients."
But the case involved months of work and resulted in no compensation. So the question becomes: Would he do it again?
Cronan stole a look at his wife, Kathie. She raised her eyebrows.
"If I could convince my wife," he said, "I think I would."
Jump to full article »
Other analysts were more tempered. "I would say I'm still neutral on the sector," said David Adelman, at Morgan Stanley Dean Witter. "I would say recent trends in individual litigation are that the industry's problems may be in pockets in the country, as opposed to pervasive." . . Proving that cigarettes are defectively designed, however, requires showing that Brown & Williamson could have made a safer cigarette and that Mr. Steele would have smoked the brand, both difficult burdens of proof. And since youth marketing wasn't an issue in the case given Mr. Steele's age when he switched to Kools, the trial lacked evidence successfully presented elsewhere that Brown & Williamson targeted underage youths as future smokers.
Gary Black, a tobacco analyst with Sanford Bernstein & Co., predicted the sector will continue to climb.
``I think you're going to see a massive sentiment shift,'' he said. ``The world's going to go back to normal.''
After the losses in California and Oregon, some analysts warned there was a sea change shift among jurors' thinking and braced for a long series of tobacco losses.
But Black said the industry can expect to lose three out of 10 cases and that ``people are going to stop looking at them as bankrupting events.''
"The industry needed to win this case and the case in Memphis to show plaintiffs' attorneys that these cases are not easy to win," Black said. "They needed to show they were in control."
And with victory, the markets responded. . . After receiving the case about 11:45 a.m. Wednesday, jurors asked court officials a question that is never far from a smoker's mind:
Would they be able to take cigarette breaks?
``I think the main thing for Brown & Williamson is that this is the third time in just a couple months that a jury has looked at the conduct of this company and rejected the notion that this company acted irresponsibly,'' he said.
J. Mike Cronan, the lawyer for the plaintiffs, said the case was a difficult one.
``It was difficult just because of public perception of smoking being a matter of individual choice,'' he said.
``We are planning to accept the verdict,'' said attorney J. Michael Cronan, who represented Steele's son and daughter. ``We do not plan to appeal the case.'' Steven McCormick, attorney for Brown & Williamson, said the jury assigned ``zero percentage'' fault to the tobacco company. ``We weren't blaming Charles Steele,'' he said. ``If he were here today, he wouldn't have any complaints against us.''
The verdict ``reflects recognition by the jury that Brown & Williamson acted responsibly in the processes of researching, testing and designing our products,'' McCormick said.
If [Steele] were here today, he wouldn't have any complaints against us. Steven McCormick, attorney for Brown & Williamson. Quoted in <i>Brown & Williamson Wins Court Case</i>
The jury in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, which began deliberations yesterday, rejected claims that the company caused the death of Charles Edward Steele, a laborer who was 56 when he died in 1995 after about 40 years of smoking.
Steele ``knew what he was doing. He knew (cigarettes) were bad, but they gave him pleasure. The pleasure outweighed the dangers,'' said Gary White, 57, of Kansas City, the jury foreman who said he has smoked since he was about 12.
[Steele] knew what he was doing. He knew (cigarettes) were bad, but they gave him pleasure. The pleasure outweighed the dangers. Gary White, 57, of Kansas City, the jury foreman who said he has smoked since he was about 12. Quoted in <i>Brown & Williamson Found Not Liable in Missouri Case</i>
``Today's verdict for the defense reflects recognition by the jury that Brown & Williamson acted responsibly in the processes of researching, testing and designing our products,'' said Steven McCormick, attorney for the company. ``The jury's conclusions are consistent with the majority of court decisions, agreeing that smoking is a matter of personal choice.
``Today's verdict represents the third straight jury verdict for Brown & Williamson in over a month. In March, B&W won in the union Iron Workers case in Akron, Ohio. Earlier this week, B&W and other tobacco manufacturers won three separate suits brought by plaintiffs in Memphis, Tennessee.
``This verdict in Kansas City was particularly gratifying because the jury specifically found that B&W was zero percent at fault. Despite vigorous efforts by the plaintiff's attorney to punish the company by seeking punitive damages the jury found that B&W did absolutely nothing wrong.
This [Steele] verdict in Kansas City was particularly gratifying because the jury specifically found that B&W was zero percent at fault. Despite vigorous efforts by the plaintiff's attorney to punish the company by seeking punitive damages the jury found that B&W did absolutely nothing wrong. Steven McCormick, attorney for B&W. Quoted in <i>Jury Delivers Positive Verdict for Brown & Williamson</i>
Brown & Williamson claims Steele knew the risks of cigarettes and that the company acted responsibly in manufacturing its cigarettes.
Brown & Williamson products, ``like all cigarettes and like many other products in society, carry with them risks to health, but . . . they are not `unreasonably dangerous' under Missouri law,'' the company said.
It company also claims there is no proof Steele died as a result of smoking.
"I certainly believe smoking has been shown to be a risky behavior," said Nicholas Brookes, chairman of the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. "...The statistics are sufficient for us to conclude that smoking causes these diseases."
Brookes' company has been sued in federal court by the family of Charles Steele, who died of lung cancer in 1995 while living in Vandalia, Mo. . . In his testimony Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Brookes pointed to more than $300 million in health research Brown & Williamson has helped to fund with independent scientists since the 1950s. . . Lawyers defending Brown & Williamson rested their case Tuesday afternoon. The jury will return this morning for instructions from the judge and closing arguments.
The statistics are sufficient for us to conclude that smoking causes these diseases. . . We have a clear responsibility to make cigarettes as safe as we can with the highest possible materials and to the highest possible standards. . . We have a responsibility to understand our product. Nicholas Brookes, chairman of Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., testifying at the Steele trial. Quoted in <i>Tobacco executive testifies at trial of Missouri lawsuit</i>
In his opening statement, Cronan quoted from internal tobacco company documents from the 1960s and 1970s. He said the documents acknowledge a link between cancer and tobacco and the addictive qualities of nicotine. At the same time, the tobacco industry was fighting stricter regulation of the industry, Cronan said.
Brown & Williamson "has consciously disregarded the safety of its customers, including Mr. Steele," Cronan said.
McCormick noted, however, that much of what is currently known about tobacco and health is based on early research funded by a tobacco industry research committee to which Brown & Williamson contributed. He pointed to a 1961 compilation of research data funded by the industry that found connections between cancer and tobacco use.
"That's more bad news for cigarette smoking, but the research was paid for by Brown & Williamson and others," McCormick said.
Federal court testimony opens this week in a civil case that alleges a major U.S. tobacco company is responsible for the lung cancer death of a Vandalia, Mo., man in 1995.
The family of Charles E. Steele filed suit against the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., in 1997, alleging the company knew its Kool brand of cigarettes were hazardous and had failed to study the harmful effects of smoking. In addition, the suit alleges the company misrepresented smoking to its customers as "socially desirable, not harmful and...beneficial to smokers." . . "Charles Edward Steele did not know that smoking cigarettes caused lung cancer, that the nicotine within the cigarettes was addictive or that he would be unable to quit smoking when he would try to," wrote J. Michael Cronan, attorney for the family.
Steele died on Oct. 4, 1995, after his lung cancer had spread to his brain.
Charles Edward Steele did not know that smoking cigarettes caused lung cancer, that the nicotine within the cigarettes was addictive or that he would be unable to quit smoking when he would try to. J. Michael Cronan, attorney for the Steele family. Quoted in <i>Testimony to begin in lawsuit against Brown & Williamson Tobacco</i>