<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Tobacco Articles: lawsuit broin</title>
<link>http://www.tobacco.org/newsfeed/lawsuit/broin.rss</link>
<description>Latest top tobacco news headlines</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<item>
<title>Tobacco's winning streak continues in flight attendant secondhand smoke cases ($$)</title>
<link>http://www.lawyersweeklyusa.com/archive/sformArchivesResults_FTS.cfm?searchString=tobacco&amp;category=All&amp;year=2008&amp;state=usa&amp;scat=0&amp;scol=1</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/259738.html</guid>
<description>After nine trials over the health effects of secondhand smoke on flight attendants, the defense has emerged victorious in all but one. The trials stem the 1997 settlement of a class action - Broin v. Philip Morris - which gave more than 3,000 fli ... 


According to Benjamine Reid of Miami, who defended the tobacco industry in its
most recent victory in November of 2007, the defense has typically argued that
the injured was not caused by secondhand smoke because &quot;in the environment of an
airplane cabin, there is not enough exposure to secondhand smoke to cause any
injury.&quot;
            
But the plaintiffs have not given up hope.
            
&quot;We have a long way to go,&quot; said Edward Sweda</description>
<source url="http://www.lawyersweekly.com/">Lawyers Weekly USA</source>
<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Big Tobacco snuffs out secondhand smoke suits ($$)</title>
<link>http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticlePrinterFriendlyNLJ.jsp?id=1199268326008</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/257868.html</guid>
<description>
The tobacco industry, however, has escaped liability in 10 of 11 suits &#8212; the bulk of those involving actions filed by flight attendants &#8212; since 2001. 

Last month, the industry racked up its latest victory in a series of lawsuits involving flight attendants who alleged that they developed cancer due to secondhand smoke on airplanes. The case was filed by a mother who claimed that her flight-attendant daughter developed lung cancer and died due to exposure to secondhand smoke on airplanes. Menchini v. R.J. Reynolds, No. 2000-20916-CA-01 (Miami-Dade Co., Fla., Cir. Ct.). 

The Menchini case was the ninth flight-attendant case to go to trial since 2001. Juries have ruled in favor of the tobacco industry in seven of those cases, although a judge ordered a new trial in one of those cases. Another went against the industry, and yet another ended in a mistrial and was eventually dismissed. 

&quot;We are seeing increased victories . . . but the tobacco companies are the defendants here and they are certainly much more vigorous in their defense tactics than the defendants in the other types of secondhand smoke lawsuits,&quot; said Edward Sweda Jr., a senior attorney with the Tobacco Products Liability Project . . .


There are potentially hundreds more flight-attendant lawsuits awaiting trial, many of them stemming from a 1997 class action settlement that gave about 60,000 flight attendants the right to sue tobacco companies individually, Sweda noted. Broin v. Philip Morris, 641 So.2d 888 (Fla. 3d Ct. App.). 

One Weston, Fla., law firm alone, Weinstein &amp; Weinstein, has more than 300 flight-attendant cases still pending. . . .


Benjamine Reid of Tampa, Fla.-based Carlton Fields' Miami office, who was the lead lawyer for R.J. Reynolds and Brown &amp; Williamson in the Menchini case, said the flight-attendant cases are not about whether second-hand smoke causes illness. Rather the question is: Does secondhand smoke cause illness in a particular environment, in this case an airplane? 

The answer is no, said Reid, who convinced the jury in the Menchini case that the amount of smoke in the aircraft was not enough to make someone sick, &quot;and there are a number of studies to support this conclusion.&quot;</description>
<source url="http://www.law.com/">Law.com</source>
<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company Wins Complete Defense Verdict in Flight Attendant Case in Florida</title>
<link>http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&amp;STORY=/www/story/11-16-2007/0004707636&amp;EDATE=</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/255544.html</guid>
<description>Today a Miami
jury found that R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and other cigarette
manufacturers were not liable in the case of a former flight attendant who
died of lung cancer in 1996. The suit was brought by Gloria Menchini, who
claimed her daughter Annette contracted lung cancer from exposure to
secondhand smoke on airplanes.
    &quot;After hearing and evaluating all the facts in this case, the
six-member jury agreed that exposure to secondhand smoke in airplanes did
not cause Annette Menchini's condition,&quot; said J. Jeffery Raborn, senior
counsel for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company.</description>
<source url="http://www.prnewswire.com">PR Newswire</source>
<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Select PM USA Litigation - Active Cases</title>
<link>http://www.altria.com/media/03_06_02_00_activecases.asp</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/254799.html</guid>
<description>Menchini Trial

*

Court: Circuit Court for the 11th Judicial District, Miami-Dade County, FL

*

Type of Case: Broin II Individual

*

Trial Start Date: November 2, 2007

*

Overview: This wrongful death case is brought against Philip Morris USA and other major cigarette manufacturers by Gloria Menchini, personal representative of Annette Menchini's estate. Annette Menchini was a former flight attendant, who was a member of the Broin class action. Gloria Menchini, the decedent's mother, alleges that as a result of exposure to ETS in airline cabins, her daughter developed lung cancer.
</description>
<source url="http://www.altria.com/">Altria Group, Inc.</source>
<pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2007 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Q&amp;A with anti-smoking crusader Patty Young</title>
<link>http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/points/stories/DN-pattyyoung_04edi.ART0.State.Edition1.4466eba.html</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/243094.html</guid>
<description>Patty Young of Dallas was a flight attendant for 36 years with American Airlines. In the 1980s, her testimony before Congress helped persuade lawmakers to ban smoking on flights, and she helped spearhead a major class-action lawsuit on the part of flight attendants. She spoke last month with assistant editorial page editor Michael Landauer:

You were a leader in the fight to get smoking banned on flights, and you have made the anti-smoking crusade your life's work. Looking back, was there one moment when you decided you were going to commit yourself to this fight?

The moment that my fight started was at the very start of my career in the summer of 1966 when nonsmoking flight attendants - we were called stewardesses then - told me that they were told by their doctors that they had the lungs of smokers. I often became extremely sick with severe headaches, vomiting, diarrhea, dizziness, blocked ears and constant coughing - often with flulike symptoms. I grew up in a home where my mother and father smoked - sadly, they have both died from lung cancer - and I was never sick like I was as a new flight attendant. . . .

If someone wanted to get involved, where should they target their energy?

People should refuse to go to places that allow smoking and also get involved in making their cities smoke-free by calling city hall and insisting on change. They should realize that when they go to places that allow smoking, they are putting themselves and their loved ones in grave danger for sickness and disease.</description>
<source url="http://www.dallasnews.com">Dallas Morning News</source>
<author>readertips@dallasnews.com</author>
<pubDate>Sun, 04 Mar 2007 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Flight Attendants' History</title>
<link>http://famri.org/fa_history/index.php</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/242537.html</guid>
<description>&lt;li&gt;
Bland Lane (click the picture to view a larger copy) Even though I never intended to make a living as a Flight Attendant, I have been one for my whole adult life, and I wouldn't change a minute of it.  . . .

I was also exposed to second hand tobacco smoke during the flights, and on transoceanic flights this could be as long as 16 hours. As a non-smoker, I learned survival skills to cope with this hazard and devised ways to clear the air. For example, using my position on the crew as Purser, I would go up to the cockpit and request to have the no smoking signs turned on for fifteen to thirty minutes or I'd ask the pilots if the cabin pressure could be raised 1,000--2,000 feet. I would also take a few minutes to suck on oxygen in the cockpit to help clear my lungs. During the years when airlines handed out free cigarettes, I would &quot;forget&quot; to do so, and take them out of the liquor kits only when asked. When my flights ended, I personally reeked of tobacco smoke--in my hair, permeating my uniforms and even the clothes in my suitcases, which were stowed in the baggage compartment.

When I learned about the class-action lawsuit instigated by non-smoking Flight Attendants, I became involved with it because as a non-smoker, I have been diagnosed with a smoker's disease. 

&lt;li&gt;Lani Blissard (click the picture to view a larger copy) I have been flying with American Airlines since 1967 when smokers had their rights and this was never questioned. . . .

&lt;li&gt;Leisa Sudderth (click the picture to view a larger copy) I started flying for American Airlines in 1985, and no one could have been more proud to put on that uniform. . . .

&lt;li&gt;Patty Young (click the picture to view a larger copy) I became a stewardess--as we were called then--in the summer of 1966. Around 1969 I began my huge, multi-layered fight to have smoking banned on all airline flights.  . . .

* &quot;Patty, 'I was told by my doctor that I have the lungs of a smoker-and I have never smoked'.&quot; This intrigued me. After asking my own doctors and others I encountered how someone could have the disease of a smoker, never having smoked, they had no answers for me. </description>
<source url="http://www.famri.org/">Flight Attendant Medical Research Institute </source>
<pubDate>Wed, 21 Feb 2007 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Nonsmokers' Rights Pioneer Bland Lane of FAMRI Passes Away </title>
<link>http://no-smoking.org/feb07/02-18-07-1.html</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/242536.html</guid>
<description>Bland Lane, an early advocate of nonsmokers' rights for airline flight attendants and passengers, and one of the founding Trustees of the Flight Attendant Medical Research Institute (FAMRI) [http://famri.org/fa_history/index.php] has passed away.

Below is a death notice from the New York Times, [02/18/07]. John Banzhaf, Executive Director of ASH, mourns her passing, and hopes in this small way to recognize her remarkable achievements. . . .

The Board of Trustees of the Flight Attendant Medical Research Institute FAMRI is very sad to announce the sudden and unexpected passing of our beloved Board member, Bland Lane, in San Francisco, on February 15, 2007.

Bland was an extraordinary and accomplished woman, who struggled to lead an active and productive life, while suffering from COPD that developed from working as a nonsmoking flight attendant for 48 years in smoke-filled airline cabins.

In recent years, Bland, along with fellow nonsmoking flight attendants, Patty Young, Lani Blissard and Leisa Sudderth, was a dedicated member of FAMRI's Board of Trustees, a court-approved, not-for-profit foundation that supports scientific research to combat the many diseases caused from exposure to tobacco smoke.</description>
<source url="http://ash.org">ASH  </source>
<pubDate>Sun, 18 Feb 2007 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Secondhand Smoke Poses Heart Disease Risk:  Study finds warnings signs in blood of those exposed to smoke</title>
<link>http://www.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=601831</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/242179.html</guid>
<description>Breathing secondhand smoke appears to increase levels of two warning signs for heart disease, fibrinogen and homocysteine, British researchers report.

&quot;The size of these effects were between about one-third and one-half that seen in relation to active smoking, which seems disproportionately large, but fits with previous studies that have shown similar effects in relation to disease risk,&quot; said lead researcher Andrea Venn, an associate professor at the University of Nottingham's Division of Epidemiology and Public Health.

The findings are published in the Feb. 13 edition of Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association. . . .


In other research involving secondhand smoke, the Flight Attendant Medical Research Institute has awarded an $8.7 million grant to New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center and other hospitals to look at the lingering effects of secondhand smoke among nonsmoking fight attendants and other service industry workers.
</description>
<source url="http://www.healthscout.com">HealthDay [HealthScout]</source>
<author>editors@healthday.com (Steven Reinberg HealthDay Reporter)</author>
<pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2007 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Fundamentals of Litigation - Florida Flight Attendant Cases</title>
<link>http://altria.com/media/03_06_01_04_04_flightattendant.asp</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/233624.html</guid>
<description>
The Florida Flight Attendant cases stem from the settlement of a class action against the backdrop of the States Attorneys General in 1998. The settlement resolved certain issues but left other issues to be decided in individual cases brought by individual flight attendants.</description>
<source url="http://www.altria.com/">Altria Group, Inc.</source>
<pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2006 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Flight Attendants' Secondhand Smoke Suits Given the Go-Ahead</title>
<link>http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1133431510744</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/211367.html</guid>
<description>The Florida Supreme Court has cleared the way for more than 3,000 flight attendants to seek compensatory damages against tobacco companies for claims that they suffered respiratory illnesses from secondhand cigarette smoke aboard U.S. airline flights.

The ruling leaves in place a crucial decision by the state's 3rd District Court of Appeal that each litigant does not have to reprove strict liability by the tobacco companies for introducing a dangerous product onto the market. All the flight attendants must show, the panel said, was that they were exposed to secondhand smoke and that the exposure led to their health problems.

On Nov. 28, the Florida Supreme Court refused to hear the companies' appeal of a judgment in favor of Lynn French, a former flight attendant who said she suffered health problems while working aboard planes during the days when travelers could still smoke.

&quot;[The Supreme Court's decision] now gives us the green light to move these cases forward after these years of delay, and it establishes what the issues are that remain to be litigated,&quot; said Miami solo practitioner Joel Perwin, who authored an answer brief opposing consideration by the state's high court.
</description>
<source url="http://www.law.com/">Law.com</source>
<pubDate>Sat, 03 Dec 2005 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Tobacco companies' secondhand smoke appeal rejected</title>
<link>http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/local/13286112.htm</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/211063.html</guid>
<description>A Florida Supreme Court decision could clear the way for trials on up to 3,000 secondhand smoking claims against the tobacco industry by flight attendants, a plaintiffs' lawyer said Tuesday.

The justices, citing lack of jurisdiction, refused Monday to consider an appeal by tobacco companies against a $500,000 award to former TWA flight attendant Lynn French. She suffers from respiratory illnesses and chronic sinusitis that she blames on secondhand smoke inhaled while working in airliner cabins.

French's case interpreted a $349 million settlement reached in 1997 between the tobacco industry and nonsmoking flight attendants in a class action lawsuit.

A series of mini-trials will decide whether individual flight attendants are entitled to additional damages and, if so, how much each should receive. Most of those trials have been on hold pending the outcome of French's case.

&quot;Now, they have a road map as to how the cases are supposed to be tried,&quot; said Rhonda Weinstein, one of French's lawyers.

There will be no further appeal, said John Sorrells, spokesman for Altria</description>
<source url="http://hosted.ap.org/">AP</source>
<pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2005 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Jury Finds PMUSA Not Responsible for Flight Attendant Medical Condition</title>
<link>http://www.philipmorrisusa.com/en/pressroom/content/press_release/articles/PR_5_3_05_JFPMUSANRFAMC.asp</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/196271.html</guid>
<description>Today, a Dade County Circuit Court jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of Philip Morris USA and other cigarette manufacturers, finding that they are not responsible for the injuries a flight attendant claims were caused by her exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) while employed as a flight attendant.

Lorraine Swaty, a 58-year-old flight attendant for US Airways, claimed her chronic sinusitis was caused by ETS exposure during her career as a flight attendant.

Ms. Swaty flew domestic flights where smoking was allowed from 1965 up until 1988 when Congress banned smoking on all domestic flights two hours or less.&#160; She was not diagnosed with chronic sinusitis until 1994, six years after the ban.

&#8220;The jury decided this case on the facts, and the facts simply did not entitle the plaintiff to recover damages,&#8221; said William S. Ohlemeyer, Philip Morris USA vice president and associate general counsel.</description>
<source url="http://www.philipmorrisusa.com/">Philip Morris USA</source>
<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2005 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Flight attendant loses second-hand smoke verdict</title>
<link>http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=healthNews&amp;storyID=8378334&amp;section=news&amp;src=rss/uk/healthNews</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/196270.html</guid>
<description>A Florida state jury on Tuesday ruled against a flight attendant who claimed her chronic sinusitis was caused by exposure to cigarette smoke on airplanes, attorneys in the case said on Tuesday.

The six-person jury answered &quot;no&quot; to the only question it posed to it, which was whether the second-hand smoke was the legal cause of Lorraine Swaty's sinus condition, Steven Hunter, one of her attorneys, said.

The trial, which began April 26, concerned one of thousands of individual lawsuits brought by flight attendants in Florida following a 1997 settlement of a class-action lawsuit on the same issue. . . .

Swaty's is the eighth flight attendant case to go to trial since 2001. Juries have ruled in favor of the tobacco industry in six of those cases and against the industry in one case. Another case ended in a mistrial in May 2002 and was subsequently dismissed.</description>
<source url="http://www.reuters.co.uk/">Reuters </source>
<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2005 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Lorillard Tobacco Company Prevails in Miami Environmental Tobacco Smoke Case</title>
<link>http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050503/cltu099.html?.v=3</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/196266.html</guid>
<description>Lorillard Tobacco Company and other cigarette manufacturers prevailed today in a case in which a flight attendant claimed she suffered personal injury from exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS).

The jury decision in the Circuit Court of Miami-Dade County was the sixth defense verdict in seven cases tried to a verdict in the Broin series of class actions, which stem from a 1997 settlement permitting individual flight attendant suits and related compensatory damage claims to go forward.
 . . .

&quot;We are extremely pleased with the verdict,&quot; said Ronald S. Milstein, Lorillard's Senior Vice President and General Counsel. &quot;We look forward to continuing our defense against similar cases.&quot;</description>
<source url="http://www.prnewswire.com">PR Newswire</source>
<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2005 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Jury rejects flight attendant claim in second-hand smoke case</title>
<link>http://newsobserver.com/news/ncwire_news/story/2369091p-8747143c.html</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/196265.html</guid>
<description>A jury on Tuesday rejected claims by a former flight attendant that her health problems were caused by exposure to second-hand cigarette smoke aboard airliners.

The Miami-Dade Circuit Court jury rejected claims by Lorraine Swaty that her chronic sinusitis was caused by smoke during her 20 years as an attendant for US Airways.
</description>
<source url="http://hosted.ap.org/">AP</source>
<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2005 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>