http://www.tobacco.org/newsfeed/category/lawsuits.rss Latest top tobacco news headlines en-us http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/political-news/plainpack-case-strong-says-roxon-20120208-1rf02.html http://tobacco.org/news/333630.html In its defence filed with the High Court, the government argues its plain packaging laws do not amount to an acquisition of the companies' property, because they do not deliver to the Commonwealth or anyone else ''any identifiable and measurable benefits or advantages''. It argues that the rights of the companies as trademark owners have always been subject to other laws. It also argues the companies use the trademarks to maintain or increase the consumption of cigarettes, which was harmful to the public and the public interest. High Court judges have previously held that ''just terms'' were not required for laws ''which provide for the creation, modification, extinguishment or transfer of rights'' in ''areas which need to be regulated in the common interest''. Brisbane Times Australia Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.nasdaq.com/article/australia-says-it-has-right-to-restrict-tobacco-packaging-20120208-00054 http://tobacco.org/news/333538.html Australia's government claims in court filings that it has the legal right to enforce plain packaging on the tobacco industry, setting up what's likely to be prolonged legal battle with the world's largest cigarette makers. In a defense filing Tuesday with the High Court of Australia, the government argues it has the power to regulate the marketing and packaging of tobacco and also claims tobacco products are harmful to public health. "The Commonwealth will vigorously defend the validity of the plain packaging laws and does not accept there is any basis for big tobacco's claims that the measures are unconstitutional," said Attorney General Nicola Roxon in a release. . . . Philip Morris is also seeking arbitration from a United Nations tribunal to challenge the Australian government's plan. The company claims that the plain packaging laws breach a trade agreement struck in 1993 between Australia and Hong Kong to protect their respective offshore investments. Rivals Imperial Tobacco Group PLC (IMT.LN), British American Tobacco PLC ( BATS.LN) and Japan Tobacco Inc. (2914.TO) have also filed cases against the Australian government, claiming the laws are unconstitutional. The hearings will run concurrently and hearings are likely to begin in April. NASDAQ Australia Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/02/city_targets_another_roll-your.html http://tobacco.org/news/333515.html STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- It's round two of Mayor Michael Bloomberg versus the city's roll-your-own cigarette stores, with the city announcing yesterday that they've filed a lawsuit seeking to close yet another store on Staten Island. The city Law Department filed suit yesterday against Victory Smoke Shop at 1765 Victory Blvd. in Castleton Corners, as well as another store in Manhattan, alleging that the shop evades cigarette taxes by providing its customers with loose tobacco, paper tubes, and access to a machine where they can make their own cigarettes. Customers at Victory Smoke Shop can buy what amounts to a carton of cigarettes, or 10 packs, for roughly $30. A store-bought pack would otherwise cost $10 to $14 for a pack of 20 cigarettes, after customers pay the $1.50 city tax and $4.35 state tax. The federal lawsuit comes just weeks after a similar store, Island Smokes in Great Kills, signed a consent degree to shut its business down in the face of a similar lawsuit. Staten Island Live Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.suntimes.com/news/10475987-418/tobacco-shop-wholesaler-sue-county-over-new-tax.html http://tobacco.org/news/333514.html A Chicago tobacco shop as well as a local wholesaler are trying to stamp out a new Cook County tax on cigars, snuff and loose tobacco, saying the tax language on the books is so “unconstitutionally vague” that “you’d have to hire a fortune teller” to determine its meaning. Arangold Corp., a tobacco wholesaler in suburban Northbrook, and Loop-based retailer Iwan Ries Co. recently filed a lawsuit in Cook County Circuit Court asking a judge to halt the tax, which kicks in March 1. The new tax — an expansion of the cigarette tax — was approved by the Cook County Board as part of the larger 2012 budget and was expected to bring in $9.6 million this year for the cash-strapped government. The lawsuit filed against Cook County and Revenue Director Zahra Ali calls the tax unconstitutional for a number of reasons, according to legal papers filed in circuit court, including when the tax is imposed. The attorney for the company questions whether the tax is imposed when the wholesaler receives a shipment or at the time it’s sold to the consumer. Chicago Sun-Times Reporter/ldonovan@suntimes.com (LISA DONOVAN Cook County Reporter/ldonovan) Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/city-files-lawsuit-city-smokes-brooklyn-staten-island-victory-smoke-shop-article-1.1018260?localLinksEnabled=false http://tobacco.org/news/333467.html City lawyers Monday filed suit against City Smokes in Brooklyn and Victory Smoke Shop in Staten Island, arguing that they evade taxes by selling paper tubes and loose tobacco — taxed at a much lower level than prepackaged cigarettes. “These legal actions are part of our ongoing efforts against businesses that think they can invent loopholes to skirt New York City’s tough cigarette laws,” said Corporation Counsel Michael Cardozo. New York Daily News Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://farmingtonhills.injuryboard.com/defective-and-dangerous-products/the-definition-of-tort-reform-hypocrisy-the-us-chamber-of-commerce.aspx?googleid=298148 http://tobacco.org/news/333376.html The Chamber filed its brief in support of the tobacco industry (one of the industries that provides back-door funding of the Chamber's "tort reform" initiatives) and against the Food and Drug Administration (in other words, the Federal Government), arguing that the government has "no legitimate authority to take space on a tobacco company's packaging or advertising to persuade consumers not to buy the product". . . . Can you think of anything more hypocritical than this lawsuit and the U.S. Chamber's support of it? The goverment (you, the taxpayer) has to spend millions in taxpayer dollars defending it. What a waste of taxpayer money and government time, just to buy time to save a few years profits for a corporate polluter, perhaps the most serious health hazard on the planet. The Chamber is constantly railing against "lawsuit abuse" (a campaign funded, in part, by the tobacco industry), but this one is not "frivolous"? A producer of an acknowledged dangerous product files a lawsuit against the government for trying to graphically warn the public that the product is grossly unsafe and the Chamber backs this lawsuit but attacks those filed by citizens to address and punish corporate wrongdoing? This is the same Chamber that says when a citizen sues a corporate wrongdoer for the serious harm suffered by the citizen, that citizen is guilty of "lawsuit abuse". This organization has zero credibility when it comes to this issue. The public should repudiate the Chamber and any candidate it supports, by its voice and its vote. As corporate lackey and tort reform hypocrite, John Stossel, would say: "Give me a break"! InjuryBoard.com Mon, 06 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.examiner.com/public-policy-in-cincinnati/cigarette-makers-intend-to-defy-the-government http://tobacco.org/news/333334.html Apparently, Cigarette makers have told U.S. District Judge Richard Leon they can't be forced to spread the government's anti-smoking advocacy with "massive, shocking, gruesome warnings" on products they legally sell. Since there is so much evidence to support how detrimental cigarettes and cigarettes makers are to society; why is there so much resistance to reduce of remove cigarettes from human consumption? Why all the fuss? Just do it. . . . For all practical purposes it seems that the cigarette makers intend to defy the government and take their products to market at any cost if it means robbing you of your health and/or costing your life. Examiner.com Sun, 05 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://tobaccoreporter.com/home.php?id=498&art=5532 http://tobacco.org/news/333302.html A former smoker is to appeal against a Danish Eastern High Court ruling dismissing allegations that two tobacco companies manipulated nicotine contents, according to an Esmerk Danish News story. Allan Lykken Jensen alleged that the Scandinavian Tobacco Group and British American Tobacco had manipulated the nicotine content of Prince cigarettes. Tobacco Reporter Denmark Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-16853251 http://tobacco.org/news/333245.html Appeal judges have rejected a bid by a major tobacco firm to challenge Scottish government plans to ban the open display of cigarettes. They turned down the challenge by Imperial Tobacco which claimed the measures were beyond the legislative competence of Holyrood. Lord President, Lord Hamilton, sitting with Lord Reed and Lord Brodie, ruled on the matter. The government measure had been delayed pending the court case outcome. BBC Online UK-Scotland Thu, 02 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://seekingalpha.com/article/333032-why-analysts-negative-commentary-on-the-tobacco-industry-is-just-wrong http://tobacco.org/news/333204.html The most glaringly negative commentary about Altria's earnings report came from Barron's, a respected publication that is also known to sometimes echo the thinking of many in the hedge fund industry. In a recent piece, written several days ago after Altria released earnings, Barron's author Sandra Ward seemed to come close to declaring the tobacco industry a dead zone for investors. Ms. Ward started her article by citing a Morgan Stanley analyst who has not recommended any of the big three tobacco names in the U.S. for three years. She stated that he is shockingly not currently recommending them because of difficulties these companies face in operating in the U.S. Of course, during the past three years, U.S. tobacco stocks have paid dividends of roughly 5%-7% a year, and have appreciated between 40%-60% without including the dividend. Nonetheless, she cited this author to suggest that the operating environment for tobacco companies in the U.S. has mysteriously become more difficult over the past six months. Her main points to back this argument up were that Altria's flagship brand is not growing its market share, fewer people are smoking cigarettes today, and, with cigarette prices now at nearly $6 a pack on average nationally, tobacco companies will have a harder time putting through future price increases. Now, call me crazy, but I think anyone with half a brain could have made all these arguments three or four years ago. The reality is that Altria's quarter was very strong, and the strength of Altria's latest quarter came in a very difficult economic environment. Altria may sell an addictive product, but it still sells a premium product that is priced higher than that of many of competitors. Despite operating in what I agree is a difficult economic environment, Altria's numbers were very strong by any metric. . . . As an attorney, I follow major developments in the litigation process at both the state and federal level very closely. Looking at recent legal and regulatory developments, I don't see any changes in the legal environment for the tobacco industry over the past year that have been anything but positive for these companies. I'm also not quite sure why these old arguments are suddenly relevant now. The Department of Justice's multi-decade federal lawsuit against the big three tobacco companies was thrown out nearly two years ago. The States have already settled with big tobacco and are issuing tobacco bonds going out 10 years. Under the Master settlement agreement, the four largest tobacco companies have agree to pay $206 billion to state governments over the course of the next 25 years. The payments are prorated to each company's respective market share and revenue. While this number sounds big, it means companies like Altria pay a couple billion a year to state governments, and have no worries about future lawsuits from state governments in the future. Seeking Alpha blog network Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://boston.citybizlist.com/7/2012/1/17/Davis-Malm-Congratulates-Michael-D.-Weisman-on-Lawyers-Weekly-.aspx http://tobacco.org/news/333202.html The Boston law firm of Davis, Malm & D'Agostine, P.C. is pleased to announce that Michael D. Weisman has been named a "2011 Lawyer of the Year" by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, the leading legal publication in the state. Mr. Weisman was recognized in the January 2 edition for his representation of Marie Evans in the precedent-setting case of Evans v. Lorillard Tobacco Company. Ms. Evans, an African American woman who smoked for 40 years, died of lung cancer in 2002. At the age of nine, she began receiving free cigarettes handed out by Lorillard Tobacco Company at a Roxbury playground. Mr. Weisman and his team at Davis Malm won a landmark victory of $152 million (later reduced to $116 million plus interest) for the estate of Marie Evans and her son, Willie Evans. This was the largest award in Massachusetts and third largest in the country in 2010. In 2011, the Court also ruled that Lorillard violated the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act (Chapter 93A) and entered a judgment of attorneys' fees and costs in excess of $2 million. The judgment noted the "exemplary skill, advocacy, and work ethic" of the plaintiff's attorneys. Citybizlist Tue, 17 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2012/02/300_million_trial_into_reprehe.html http://tobacco.org/news/333199.html Ten years after a Multnomah County jury awarded $150 million after finding Philip Morris deceived a low-tar cigarette smoker into thinking she'd chosen a healthier alternative, the case is before a jury again. The Oregon Supreme Court overturned the first jury's punitive-damage award because of the way the jury was instructed to deliberate. This time, with a slight but important tweak to the instructions, a new 12-person jury will decide how reprehensible the tobacco maker's actions were in causing the death of Salem resident Michelle Schwarz. The jury can award up to $300 million. Jurors were not told about the original verdict of $150 million. Opening statements began today in the courtroom of Judge Henry Kantor. The trial is expected to last four weeks. . . . Schwarz began smoking in 1964 when she was 18. She tried to quit but failed. In 1976, Philip Morris introduced a low-tar cigarette under the brand Merit. Schwarz, who smoked a pack a day, believed the low-tar cigarettes weren't as harmful as regular cigarettes, so she switched. "She smoked these low-tar cigarettes from 1976 until her death in 1999" at age 53, said Larry Wobbrock, an attorney for Schwarz's estate. "She smoked them up until she got sick and couldn't." Schwarz died after contracting lung cancer that metastasized with a tumor in her brain. The family's attorneys successfully argued to the first jury that Philip Morris was aware that low-tar smokers tended to inhale more deeply and hold the smoke longer in their lungs -- enabling smokers to rationalize a habit they would otherwise consider deadly. "The case is no longer about the conduct of Michelle Schwarz. It's about the misconduct of Philip Morris," Wobbrock said. An attorney for Philip Morris, however, spoke at length about how Schwarz should have known that smoking in general was dangerous. . . . Kelly also said Philip Morris doesn't make $300 million of profit in five days. What's more, he said Philip Morris has paid dearly for damage caused by smoking -- $55 billion since 1997 as part of an agreement with 50 state attorneys general. About $526 million of that has gone to Oregon. The Oregonian https://blog.advance.net/mt-static/html/agreen@oregonian.com (Aimee Green, The Oregonian) Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/what-bill-of-rights-138630639.html http://tobacco.org/news/333184.html The Obama administration was back in court Wednesday, trying to convince a judge that tobacco companies should be required to put large, gruesome, graphic photos on cigarette packs to show that the habit kills smokers and their babies. . . . Mr. Obama once taught constitutional law. But apparently the government he leads can't be bothered by the faded words of dead 18th-century males like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, who sought to protect Americans from the incursions of a tyrannical state. Las Vegas Review-Journal webmaster@reviewjournal.com Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.wkow.com/story/16661192/oregon-school-district-faces-lawsuit http://tobacco.org/news/333148.html An attorney for Disability Rights Wisconsin claims the state law that allows school districts to deny enrollment to students who have been expelled from another district is unconstitutional . . . Oregon School District is named in the lawsuit for denying enrollment to a student who was expelled from a Janesville school after serving several suspensions for allegations of sexual assault and possessing tobacco. WKOW-TV ABC 27 jbeard@wkowtv.com (John Beard) Thu, 02 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.dailytidings.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120202/NEWS02/202020307 http://tobacco.org/news/333140.html As the Oregon Legislature convened Wednesday for the start of a monthlong legislative session, key lawmakers proposed spending much of a $56 million dollar legal windfall to avoid cutting services for the sick and needy. Three legislators in charge of writing the state's financial plan suggest taking three-quarters of the income from a court victory over tobacco giant Philip Morris, roughly $41 million, to shrink a $200 million spending gap. They'd use budget maneuvers and service cuts to cover the rest of the deficit. "Philip Morris' unwilling contribution to our state coffers came at a very opportune time," said Rep. Dennis Richardson, R-Central Point, a co-chairman of the Budget Committee. Budget writers discussed their proposal as lawmakers began their first even-year session since voters decided to make the Legislature meet annually. Associated Press Thu, 02 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT