Why It Was Rendered, and What It Means
Jump to full article: FindLaw Writ, 2003-05-27
Author: ANTHONY J. SEBOK
Intro: The significance of this reversal cannot be underestimated. It brings to an end one of the most important episodes of American law--the use of multi-billion dollar lawsuits to change a politically powerful industry.
It also shows that, while the law can be changed to achieve many laudatory social goals, it can change only so much before it snaps back into its old shape. The Florida court had the unenviable task of restoring the law's rightful contours. The reasons it did so are important to understand . . .
What changed over the course of the Engle litigation? Most importantly, it is now well understood that Engle is no longer needed - a truth that may have encouraged the Florida appeals court to write the sweeping decision that it rendered.
In 1994, when Engle was filed, the tobacco industry seemed to occupy a position of political invulnerability. Now, of course, it is a political pariah.
The industry operates under a severely constrained environment. . . .
Like grand theater, Engle was a melodrama--overdrawn, excessive, and ultimately as much about emotion as about law. It served its purpose, and now it is being retired.
The saga of the case is an example of how lawsuits can sometimes have their greatest effect outside the courtroom, not within. For those who think America is a better place now because Big Tobacco has been domesticated, the legal rights and wrongs of Judge Kaye's trial plan may seem like a secondary concern - and, indeed, even this landmark reversal of a landmark verdict may seem a secondary event.
Jump to full article » |