Legal

State

Ex-smoker wins $1.4 million in asbestos-filter suit (CA)
Lorillard Tobacco Co. has been ordered to pay a former smoker $1.36 million in damages after a jury found the company guilty of violating his right to buy and use a safe product. Don Lenney was diagnosed with mesothelioma, a cancer linked to asbestos in 2009, and subsequently sued Lorillard over their use of asbestos-containing Micronite filters in Kent brand cigarettes, which he smoked for approximately four years. Lorillard and the filter manufacturer, Hollingsworth & Vose, argued that the asbestos-containing Micronite filters were safe and that there was no evidence that the plaintiff, Don Lenney, had ever smoked the cigarette brand in question. The jury found that while Lorillard had not been negligent, they were 35% responsible, while Hollingsworth & Vose was 25% responsible, and asbestos suppliers were 40% responsible for Lenney’s illness. Lorillard has won 15 of 20 similar lawsuits in the U.S. and plans to appeal the verdict. Read more here.

Engle trial updates (FL)
Several Engle progeny cases have been decided in favor of families of smokers who suffered from tobacco-related illnesses. Engle progeny cases stem from a class-action lawsuit thrown out by the Florida Supreme Court in 2006. In the Hatziyannakis v. Philip Morris case, a jury found Philip Morris 32% responsible for the lung cancer death of Mr. Hatziyannakis, who smoked Marlboros for 27 years. The jury awarded the Hatziyannakis family $155,000 in general damages, which will be reduced due to the jury’s assigning 68% of the fault to him. The family was also awarded $114,609 in economic damages. In Huish v. R.J. Reynolds, a jury delivered a verdict in favor of the family of John Huish, a former smoker who died of lung cancer in 1993, awarding them $750,000 in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages. The jury allocated responsibility to Huish (50%), R.J. Reynolds (25%), and Philip Morris (25%); the compensatory damages will be reduced, and punitive damages are split according to the designated percent fault. In the Miller v. Lorillard case, the family of deceased smoker Jackie Miller was awarded $6 million in compensatory damages and $11.3 million in punitive damages against Lorillard Tobacco. The jury found the company 65% responsible for Miller’s lung cancer after her being a smoker for decades. In Mack v. RJR, a $1 million verdict was given in favor of the family of deceased smoker Peter Mack, who suffered from laryngeal cancer and COPD. The jury determined that R.J. Reynolds was negligent, sold a defective product, and was 51% responsible for Mack’s illness.

New Orleans casino owner sued over secondhand smoke (LA)
The owner of Harrah’s New Orleans Casino is being sued for failing to protect employees from secondhand smoke. The mother of Maceo Bevrotte filed the suit after her son, a longtime employee of the casino, died from cancer, which she attributes to his workplace exposure to secondhand smoke. The suit claims that Harrah’s has not taken steps to reduce employees’ secondhand smoke exposure until recently, and must still do more to provide a safe workplace. The suit also asks a judge to certify the case as class action for a minimum of 1,000 past, present, or future nonsmoking casino employees. Casinos and bars are exempted from Louisiana’s smoke-free laws. Click here to read more.

top

National

Tobacco companies fire back on government-proposed ads
Some tobacco companies are arguing that required corrective statements proposed by the U.S. Justice Department are inaccurate and intentionally harmful to the companies. Tobacco companies will be required to use the statements in advertising campaigns as a remedy for concealing the health hazards of smoking, as per a 2006 court ruling by Judge Gladys Kessler. The industry contends that the Food and Drug Administration’s new authority to regulate tobacco negates the involvement of the court system, and also the use of the corrective statements. They furthermore argue that the proposed statements are not purely factual, as was required by the court. A final decision about what the advertising campaign will consist of, including which corrective statements will be included, has yet to be made by Kessler. Read more here, or click here to read the corrective statements recommended by the government.

U.S. Supreme Court won't hear challenge of $246B tobacco deal
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a lawsuit filed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) on behalf of a small cigarette company, a tobacco shop owner, and a smoker, claiming that the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) created a marketplace that was hostile to small tobacco companies. The MSA requires tobacco companies to make payments to states where their products are sold to help pay for healthcare costs from tobacco-related illness. The CEI argued that the MSA protects large companies by imposing penalties on smaller companies that were not included in the settlement, and violates the Compact Clause of the Constitution by creating a regulatory scheme that was not approved by Congress. As a result of the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the appeal, lower court decisions in favor of the states and the MSA will stand. Click here to read more.

top

International

New international tobacco law website
The International Legal Consortium at the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids has just launched www.TobaccoControlLaws.org, a web-based legislative advocacy and research tool that provides analyses of tobacco control legislation from around the world. Key policy areas covered include smoke-free laws, tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship, and packaging and labeling. Click here to visit the new website.

top

Back to Table of Contents