Jump to full article: Law.com, 2002-02-09
Author: Margaret Cronin Fisk / The National Law Journal / February 11, 2002
Intro: Fontana had been a flight attendant for 25 years, until she quit in 1996 because of her deteriorating lung function. She had never smoked and her only exposure to tobacco smoke was on the job. . .
The defense focused on attacking causation. The defense asserted that Fontana had been diagnosed with sarcoidosis, but not emphysema or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
"We tried to convey to the jury that the medical or scientific literature established a lack of a link between smoking and sarcoidosis," Engram said.
"We thought we might be too technical," he noted. So the defense produced a diagram to prove its point that exposure to smoke neither caused nor aggravated her lung disease.
The chart covered the last four years Fontana was a flight attendant. "These were the years she was sickest," Engram said.
"The chart showed that when she went to her lung doctor bore no relationship to the dates she flew," Engram noted.
If the environmental smoke had exacerbated her lung problems, he said, she would most likely see the lung specialist after flying.
This did not occur, Engram said. He knew the defense had scored well with this point when during deliberations, "the jury asked for that chart."
The plaintiff was seeking nearly $4 million in economic damages alone, but on April 5, 2001, a Miami jury returned a complete defense verdict. Post-trial motions were denied in September. The verdict will be appealed.
Jump to full article » |