Tobacco Cases
Video Transcripts Available for Dana Raulerson v. R.J. Reynolds
Court TV has video transcripts available for this case from Jacksonville, Florida.
Florida Appeals Court Reverses Tobacco Verdict
A Florida appeals court overturned a landmark verdict against the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. June 22, 1998, citing the failure of plaintiff Grady Carter to meet the state's four-year statute of limitations by six days. Carter, who began smoking in 1947, sued the tobacco company after learning that he had developed lung cancer in 1991. He won a $750,000 judgment in the case in 1996.
Guatemala Sues Tobacco Companies
Guatemala earned the distinction of being the first country outside of the United States to sue tobacco companies when it filed suit on May 12, 1998. The Attorney General of Guatemala, Acisclo Valladares, who filed the suit, is seeking damages of at least $800 million dollars to recover the cost of treating smoking-related illnesses in Guatemala. The suit alleges that
tobacco companies "have conspired to conceal the truth about their tobacco products ... for the sole purpose of ... maximizing their profits to the detriment of and at the expense of every user of their tobacco products." Guatemala is suing the companies that have a hold of the country's cigarette market: namely, Philip Morris, Brown and Williamson, the Liggett Group, B.A.T. Industries, British American Tobacco Company and Batus Holdings.
Florida Reaches Settlement with Tobacco Companies
Florida announced August 25, 1997 that it had reached a settlement for $11.3 billion with tobacco companies. The lawsuit, aimed at punishing the industry and recovering Medicaid expenses spent on sick and terminally ill smokers, originally sought $12.3 billion ($1.3 billion for tax money spent on sick smokers without insurance, $11 billion in punitive damages against the tobacco industry). Florida's settlement, which came as Congress is still mulling a proposed $368.5 billion national settlement between 40 states and the tobacco industry, is larger than Mississippi's $3.6 billion settlement reached on July 3. The following is Florida's settlement with the tobacco industry.
States and Tobacco Industry Reach Landmark Settlement
An historic settlement between states and the tobacco industry was reached June 20, 1997. In addition to paying $368.5 billion over the course of 25 years, the tobacco industry has agreed to submit to regulation of tobacco as a drug and to curb advertising and marketing of tobacco products.
Disgruntled Shareholders Given Go-Ahead to Sue
U.S. District Judge Michael Mukasey reversed his earlier dismissal of a suit
brought against Philip Morris Companies, Inc. by disgruntled stockholders. Plaintiffs
produced new evidence concerning the cigarette manufacturer's knowledge of nicotine's
addictive properties to persuade Mukasey to issue the new opinion and order. Here is
the April 8, 1996 order.
Tobacco Companies Prevent Liggett from Disclosing Confidential Documents
The four largest tobacco manufacturers filed suit against the Liggett Group in an effort to prevent Liggett from disclosing confidential documents. The Liggett Group broke rank in March from the larger tobacco companies by settling a class-action lawsuit by smokers. The tobacco manufacturers argue that the documents were developed as joint work product at a time when Liggett took part in an industry-wide defense strategy against the class-action suits. On March 20, 1997, a North Carolina judge granted a temporary restraining order enjoining Liggett from disclosing jointly-owned confidential documents.
Tobacco Companies Hope to Avert FDA Regulation
On February 10, 1997, the tobacco industry filed a motion for a summary judgment in their suit against the Food and Drug Administration, hoping to end attempts by the FDA to regulate tobacco production and advertising. The tobacco industry claims that the FDA has no jurisdiction to regulate tobacco and that given the power, it would "do everything it can to stamp out tobacco use in the United States, without regard to economic or other consequences and in violation of established congressional policy."
New Jersey Sues Tobacco Companies
On September 9, 1996, New Jersey became the latest state to file suit against the nation's leading tobacco companies to recoup money spent on treating tobacco-related illnesses. The suit alleges that tobacco companies sold and marketed their products "knowing full and well that when the State of New Jersey's citizens used those cigarettes,...[they] would be substantially certain to suffer injury, disease, and illness, including cancer, emphysema, heart disease, and other illnesses causing disability and death and that the State of New Jersey itself would be economically injured thereby."
Widow of Marlboro Man Sues Philip Morris
The widow of the "Marlboro Man" filed suit August 30, 1996 against the tobacco industry, alleging that its fraud and deceit contributed to David McLean's death from lung cancer. McLean was featured in a long-running campaign for Philip Morris' most popular brand of cigarettes. McLean's widow alleges that he routinely smoked as many as five packs of cigarettes a day in the course of shooting print and television commercials.
Michigan Sues Tobacco Companies
Michigan is the thirteenth state to sue the nation's leading tobacco companies to recover health care costs from cigarette-related illnesses. In this suit, filed on August 21, 1996, Michigan also names several major wholesalers and vending machine operators as defendants.
Kansas Sues Tobacco Companies
Kansas is one of the latest states to sue the nation's leading tobacco companies to recover health care costs incurred because of the harmful effects of cigarette smoke. The Kansas suit also cites violations of the state's Consumer Protection Act stemming from what it alleges were deceptive trade practices used by the tobacco industry in denying consumers accurate information on the health risks of smoking.
Los Angeles County Sues Tobacco Companies
In this complaint against the nation's leading cigarette manufacturers, the County of Los Angeles alleges "that through a fraudulent course of conduct that has spanned decades, Defendants have manufactured, promoted, distributed or sold tobacco products to thousands of residents of the County knowing, but denying and concealing, that their tobacco products contain a highly addictive drug, known as nicotine, and have, unbeknownst to the public, controlled and manipulated the amount and big-availability of nicotine in their tobacco products for the purpose and with the intent of creating and sustaining addiction."
Arch v. American Tobacco
After a federal appeals court did not grant class-action status to a lawsuit accusing the tobacco manufacturers of manipulating nicotine levels to keep smokers hooked and suppressing data that cigarettes are addictive, The Castano Plaintiffs Legal Committee announced its intention to pursue state-wide class actions across the country. This one was recently filed in Pennsylvania.
Tobacco Companies Sue to Block Disclosure Law
Four tobacco companies filed this lawsuit against the state of Massachusetts to block enforcement of a tobacco disclosure law. The law requires tobacco companies to provide lists of ingredients in their products other than tobacco, water, and reconstituted tobacco. The companies claim the law would force them to give up trade secrets in violation of the Constitutional provisions against seizing property without compensation. They also claim the required disclosures would place an undue burden on interstate and foreign commerce.
Connecticut Sues Tobacco Companies
On July 18, 1996, Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal filed this suit against seven tobacco companies for $1 billion, charging that they had engaged in "conspiracy to mislead, deceive and confuse" the state and its residents about the debilitating and addictive effects of cigarettes. Two weeks ago, four tobacco companies sued Blumenthal in a pre-emptive strike, charging that his expected suit would unconstitutionally impede the interstate commerce of a legal product.
Philip Morris v. Blumenthal
On June 28, 1996, four tobaccco companies filed this suit against Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal to prevent him from filing suit against the tobacco companies. Blumenthal is planning to file a suit against the companies seeking to recoup state funds spent on smoking-related illnesses.
Minnesota v. Philip Morris
The Supreme Court denied a request for certiorari by the tobacco companies, allowing this order to stand in the State of Minnesota's suit to recover health care and other costs resulting from the use of tobacco products. The order covers creation of a central repository for discovery documents and allows plaintiff access to an internal tobacco industry database of research and litigation documents.
Appeals Court Rejects Class Action Lawsuit Against Tobacco Industry
The tobacco industry won a major legal victory on May 23, 1996, when a federal appeals court refused to grant class-action status to a lawsuit accusing the companies of manipulating nicotine levels to keep smokers hooked and suppressing data that cigarettes are addictive.
Maryland Sues Tobacco Companies
The State of Maryland has joined other states, including Massachusetts and Texas, in suing the tobacco industry to recover funds paid out for health care and other costs. The state argues that the costs were incurred because the "Big Six" tobacco concerns carried out a conspiracy of false warranties and disinformation to prevent potential smokers from realizing the likelihood of addiction and the health effects of smoking. The suit, filed May 1, 1996, claims that the addictive and carcinogenic effects of cigarette smoking have been known to the management in the tobacco industry for decades.
Texas Sues Tobacco Companies
Texas has become the seventh state to file suit against the tobacco industry, claiming the companies placed profits above the well-being of the American people, and that they deliberately suppressed evidence linking nicotine and various illnesses. The suit also alleges that the tobacco industry used advertising targeted at children to build their customer base, obscuring the addictive, unhealty elements of smoking. The lawsuit was filed in federal court on March 28, 1996.
Statements of Former Philip Morris Employees
Three former employees of the Philip Morris company gave these sworn statements to the Food and Drug Administration. The statements seemingly contradict the company's publicly-held position on the purposes and nature of its own research into the effects of its products and the process of "restoring" nicotine to cigarette tobacco. The FDA is soliciting comment on these declarations.
Tobacco Settlement: Liggett Group
The Liggett Group, the smallest of the nation's five major tobacco companies, has broken ranks with the rest of the industry and agreed to settle several huge liability suits. The largest suit that Liggett settled was the Castano action case in which about 60 law firms are suing on behalf of every U.S. smoker who claims to be addicted. This is the settlement.
Media Attempts to Unseal Informer's Deposition
A group of newspapers filed this Dec. 4, 1995 motion to unseal the testimony of Jeffrey Wigand, a former researcher at Brown & Williamson, a tobacco company. Wigand provided information to 60 Minutes for a segment the TV news magazine chose not to air because of the risk of being sued. Wigand was deposed as an expert witness in the case of Moore v. American Tobacco Co., but his deposition has been placed under seal by the court.
Tobacco Companies Sue Texas
A group of tobacco companies has filed suit against the Attorney General of Texas and various state departments to preempt a "threatened lawsuit" by the state. The tobacco companies claim that the state is preparing a suit against them for the costs incurred by Medicaid and other health programs due to the detrimental effects of cigarette smoking on Texans. They also claim that the state authorities are overreaching their authority and that any suit should be dismissed for various procedural reasons. Here is the Nov. 28, 1995 petition.
Tobacco Company Sues Informer
Brown & Williamson has filed this suit against Jeffrey Wigand, a former employee, for allegedly breaching employee confidentiality agreements by providing information regarding the tobacco company's research and business operations to the media and to plaintiffs in a products liability suit.
In a much reported sequence of events, Mr. Wigand provided information to CBS's "60 Minutes" for a segment which the network chose not to air because of the risk of being named a defendant in a suit much like this one. CBS has reportedly agreed to indemnify Mr. Wigand regarding this suit.
Broin v. Philip Morris Companies
A Florida court order permitting airline flight attendants to sue tobacco companies for second-hand smoke-related health problems.
Florida v. U.S. Tobacco Companies
This is the full text of the complaint filed by the state of Florida against major tobacco companies "to force cigarette manufacturers to pay for the health care crises their products have caused." The complaint asks the court to order "the defendants to disgorge all profits from sales of cigarettes in Florida."
N.Y. Smoking Complaint
A cigar-smoking New York City lawyer has filed a complaint challenging the City's new anti-smoking law, as it applies to cigars. The lawyer argues that there is no basis for assuming that studies showing harmful effects of second-hand cigarette smoke hold true for cigar smoke. He also challenges the constitutionality of the new law, and states, "Prior to January 1, 1995, a number of desirable women enjoyed the company of their cigar smoking male companions and understood the enhancing qualities of maleness."
RJR Nabisco Complaint
RJR Nabisco's complaint against ABC for allegedly making false and defamatory statements. ABC accused RJR of adding significant amounts of nicotine to cigarettes to "hook" tobacco users.
Confidential Info on Tobacco
Three documents in the matter involving tobacco manufacturer Brown & Williamson's attempt to recover confidential information from the University of California.
The confidential information was mailed to the university anonymously. The return address on the envelop was "Mr. Butts," a character in the Doonesbury comic strip that parodies Washington tobacco lobbyists. Personal injury lawyers believe the materials could be helpful in litigation against the tobacco industry.
In this download:
1) Brown & Williamson's complaint
2) Brown & Williamson's memorandum of points in authorities in support of a request for a temporary restraining order
3) Brown & Williamson's memorandum of points in support of a writ of possession
Tobacco Companies v. FDA
In response to the White House's announced initiative on childhood smoking and the FDA's moves towards imposing new restrictions on the tobacco industry, several tobacco firms filed this lawsuit against the FDA. The tobacco companies are seeking injunctions against what they consider an illegal overstepping of the limits of the FDA's congressionally-approved authority.
| 
