Jump to full article: Kansas City (MO) Star, 2002-06-22
Author: TONY RIZZO and JULIUS A. KARASH / The Kansas City Star
Intro: Citing R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.'s "extremely reprehensible" conduct, a judge on Friday ordered the tobacco giant to pay $15 million to a Kansas City, Kan., man who smoked Camel cigarettes for 43 years.
U.S. District Judge John Lungstrum's punitive damage award was thought to be the first in the country ordered by a judge in a smoker-liability case. . .
Daniel W. Donahue, Reynolds' senior vice president and deputy general counsel, said company officials didn't think punitive damages were warranted.
"As we showed during the trial, Reynolds Tobacco had no information about smoking and health that wasn't publicly known during the entire time that the plaintiff...smoked," Donahue said.
Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. was a defendant in the lawsuit earlier and had been assessed a $1,984 share of the $198,400 February jury verdict. Brown & Williamson was dropped from the case, however, after reaching an agreement with Burton. . .
Kenneth McClain, an Independence lawyer who represents Burton, characterized the case as a landmark legal proceeding "in which R.J. Reynolds' pattern of deceit and deception was exposed to the whole world." . .
"I think this decision, along with the ongoing trend we're seeing -- with juries and now a judge getting outraged at these companies -- will have a cumulative effect," Sweda said. "It will force tobacco companies to change their behavior, or they will become more and more marginalized in society, with some very severe financial punishments imposed against them, along with increasing societal scorn and contempt."
Sweda said the punitive-damages award was the first that had been initially assessed in this type of tobacco case by a judge rather than a jury; the first to be levied in a federal court; and the first to be levied in a case in the Midwest.
As a precedent-setting case, he predicted, it would be cited by other plaintiffs around the country who have cases against Reynolds.
Jump to full article » |