Jump to full article: Associated Press (AP), 2008-11-06
Author: BILL KACZOR Associated Press Writer
Intro: A tobacco lawyer asked the Florida Supreme Court to reverse a $545,000 product liability verdict Thursday because the ailing smoker who won the judgment wasn't required to prove the company could have made a safer cigarette.
It's a case that could serve as a precedent affecting other smokers and a broad range of what have been legally classified as "inherently dangerous" products, said Alvin B. Davis, representing cigarette maker Liggett Group Inc.
"Products many Floridians enjoy, such as convertible automobiles, motorcycles, personal watercraft, and a cold beer on a hot day could all be legally condemned," lawyers for several business groups wrote in a friend-of-the-court brief.
The 4th District Court of Appeal certified the issue to the Supreme Court as a question of great public importance.
A three-judge appellate panel unanimously said there's no requirement for an injured party to establish an alternative safer design in a ruling that upheld the verdict won by a Broward County woman.
. . .
Unless injured parties are required to prove an alternative design would be safer, manufacturers can be required to pay damages whether or not they did anything wrong, Alvin Davis argued.
"Cigarettes are unreasonably dangerous, and we don't dispute that," he said after the hearing. "The question is whether that alone is a sufficient basis to hold the manufacturer liable."
Jump to full article »
Quotes from this article:
Cigarettes are unreasonably dangerous, and we don't dispute that. The question is whether that alone is a sufficient basis to hold the manufacturer liable.
Tobacco lawyer Alvin Davis, after a hearing in the Beverly Davis [no relation] case.
|