Tobacco.org

Video of Hess v. RJ Reynolds 

Description:Hess v. RJR Reynolds was the first of the "Engle progeny" tobacco liability suits to go to trial. The jury awarded $8M to the smoker's widow and her son.

In the lawsuit, Stuart Hess's widow Elaine Hess sued cigarette maker Philip Morris, claiming that her husband could not stop smoking because he was addicted to nicotine. Mr. Hess died of lung cancer at age 55, in 1997. . . .

Type Start Date End Date Court Status Sessions

Trial 2009-02-03 2009-02-18 Judicial Complex Concluded - Verdict 19

Trial 2008-12-03 2008-12-04 Judicial Complex Concluded - MisTrial 3

Jump to full article »

SOUSA: Jury awards need to be fair, not lucrative 

What made this award stand out was that the same jury determined that the smoker, not the tobacco company, was the one mostly responsible for his own death.

The verdict sends a dangerous message: People may engage in detrimental behavior and take comfort in knowing that their loved ones might benefit financially from that behavior once they're gone. . . .

''It could seem excessive to have 8,000 of these trials and have each person ask for punitive damages,'' says Elizabeth Burch, professor of law at Florida State University. ''At some point, the judge is going to say you've been punished enough.'' If that happens, the plaintiffs in early cases will receive the benefit of punitive awards, while later plaintiffs may get little or nothing. Plaintiff awards won't be a matter of justice, but the luck of the draw.

So is it possible to punish a wrongdoer without turning the process into a lawsuit lottery?

''Some states have become very innovative in that regard,'' says Darren McKinney, spokesman for the American Tort Reform Association, a nonpartisan group. One method several states have used is a concept called split recovery: The plaintiff only gets a portion of the award, while the other portion goes to a fund created by the state, to be used for a public purpose. . . .

It's time we return the punitive award to its roots. Split recovery wouldn't be perfect, but the fairness it would bring to the process could be reward enough.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Smoking and personal responsibility 

A Florida jury has done a strange thing. It has freely acknowledged that a man who died after decades as a chain smoker had the primary responsibility for his harmful habit. But in the same ruling, it has ordered tobacco company Philip Morris to pay the man’s widow the shocking sum of $8 million — most of it in punitive damages. . . .

We have great sympathy for smokers who become sick or die, even though they brought those tragic circumstances on themselves by smoking. But sympathy for a sick smoker or for his surviving relatives should not be the basis on which large amounts of damages are awarded in court.

The reality is, the dangers of smoking have been widely known by the public for many decades — even for centuries, judging from historical records. The Florida man who died, Stuart Hess, had smoked although he surely knew he was seriously endangering his health. The same is true of other smokers.

LETTER: SWEDA: Smoker verdict based on Morris’ conduct 

Regarding your one-sided editorial (“Smoking and Personal Responsibility,” Feb. 21), here are some facts about the recent $8 million jury verdict against Philip Morris in Florida.

While I agree that “sympathy for a sick smoker or for his surviving relatives” should not be the basis for large court awards, that wasn’t what happened here. The basis for the award was the jury’s justifiable outrage at Philip Morris’ long history of reprehensible misconduct. Stuart Hess, who died of lung cancer in 1997 at the age of 55, started smoking at the age of 13 during the 1950s — before any health warnings appeared on the packages. He continued smoking for 40 years after he had become addicted to nicotine as a child.

Instead of falling for the smokescreen of Philip Morris’ blame-the-smoker-for-smoking defense, this jury examined the full picture of what happened over the span of those four decades. That includes Stuart Hess’ smoking history and his inability to quit smoking until it was too late and Philip Morris’ conduct in deliberately targeting youth for addiction and denying the truth about the health hazards of smoking. Taking all of these factors into account, the Florida jury rendered a just verdict.

Jump to full article »

• SEBOK: The Recent, Eight-Million-Dollar Verdict Against Philip Morris and in Favor of A Smoker's Family: Why It Will Likely Be Reversed as Unconstitutional 

In the mini-trial in Hess, Judge Streitfeld instructed the jury that a "prior court decision" (that is, Engle) had already decided that Philip Morris had "concealed or omitted material information . . . knowing that the material was false or misleading" and that it had entered into agreements with other tobacco companies to "conceal or omit information regarding health affects of cigarettes or their addictive nature with the intentions [sic] that smokers and the public would rely on this information" (emphasis added). He then asked the jury, Did "Stuart Hess rely to his detriment on any statement by Philip Morris USA that omitted material information?" The jury answered "yes" with regard to certain statements made before May 5, 1982.

The problem with these instructions is that the jury was not asked whether Hess relied on a statement or omission by Philip Morris that was "fraudulent or made with the intention to conceal or omit." Rather, the jury was asked whether Hess's reliance on a statement or omission by Philip Morris caused his injuries. But Philip Morris cannot be held liable for statements or omission that caused Hess's death unless those statements or omissions were wrongful--that is fraudulent, either by commission or omission. The fact that the judge told the jury that another court had concluded that Philip Morris had been found to have engaged in fraud that harmed some group of people in Florida is irrelevant; the question is whether these particular statements were fraudulent.

If Judge Streitfeld had told the jury in the Hess case that another court had found that the specific statements or omissions upon which Hess relied were fraudulent, then it would be a very different story. But the judge did not do so, for a very good reason: The Engle court never produced a list of specific fraudulent statements or omissions. Rather, all the Engle court found was that the tobacco companies conspired to conceal or omit information regarding the health effects of cigarette smoking, or the addictive nature of smoking cigarettes and that the tobacco companies lied about cigarettes, either orally or in writing. In other words, while it is possible--even likely--that the Engle court found that some of the statements or omissions upon which Hess relied caused his death, we just don't know for sure. . . .

I predict that the United States Supreme Court will find that the Engle mini-trial concept is unconstitutional, for the reasons I have outlined above. The question is, why doesn't the Florida Supreme Court now stay the state mini-trials, just like the Eleventh Circuit has done? I recognize that the state courts do not have to agree with the federal courts, and that federalism thrives on a healthy rivalry between the state and federal systems. But everyone knows where this question is going--to the United States Supreme Court. Why not wait until it is decided before continuing to litigate 3999 more cases?

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Striking it rich on his mistakes 

Assuming he started smoking in the late 1950s or early 1960s, he did so at a time when it was widely know that it very hard to stop. Parents in those days routinely warned teenagers who experimented with cigarettes not to "get in the habit."

Whatever the tobacco companies claim, their product was often referred to as "cancer sticks." Even if he didn't believe that, he would have been only about 22 when the U.S. Surgeon General declared there was a link between cigarettes and lung cancer and required warning labels on packs. Yet, he continued to puff away for another 33 years.

All of which raises the question of how much his survivors should profit from his mistakes.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Smoking and personal responsibility 

A Florida jury has done a strange thing. It has freely acknowledged that a man who died after decades as a chain smoker had the primary responsibility for his harmful habit. But in the same ruling, it has ordered tobacco company Philip Morris to pay the man’s widow the shocking sum of $8 million — most of it in punitive damages. . . .

The reality is, the dangers of smoking have been widely known by the public for many decades — even for centuries, judging from historical records. The Florida man who died, Stuart Hess, had smoked although he surely knew he was seriously endangering his health. The same is true of other smokers. . . .

But an injustice based on the negative public image of tobacco companies or on sympathy for a smoker who knowingly took chances with his health is still an injustice.

Jump to full article »

STEIN: Where's the personal responsibility in these tobacco lawsuits? 

Nobody relishes jury duty, but I would have liked to have been on the panel deciding the amount of money going to the Cooper City widow should get from tobacco giant Philip Morris. . . .

The $8 million award is way too much.

Sorry, but there has to be more personal responsibility here, and in all of the smoking lawsuits.

Yes, tobacco companies may load on the nicotine, but who in the last 40 years 40 years does not know about the dangers of cigarette smoking? . . .

Jump to full article »

MCCULLOUGH: Responsibility goes up in smoke 

On Wednesday, a Florida jury did its part in the ongoing war against responsibility by awarding the widow of a lifelong smoker $8 million. .. . .

The tobacco companies may deserve to be punished for their deceptive marketing practices, but how in the world they are responsible for Stuart Hess chainsmoking for years is beyond my capabilities to understand.

Did Philip Morris make a product it knew was addictive and dangerous to people's health? Of course it did.

But Stuart Hess knew, too. The surgeon general's warnings about the dangers of smoking have been on cigarettes for decades. . . .

He could've quit if he'd wanted to badly enough. I've known quite a few people who've smoked for decades, including my mother-in-law and my own father, who've quit. It can be done.

But if you can't, don't worry, because nowadays it's not your fault anymore. . . .

I'm truly sorry that this man died of cancer, and I feel sadness and sympathy for his widow. But Philip Morris did not put a gun to his head and force him to smoke.

Making them pay $8 million is not going to change the consequences of his actions.

Jump to full article »

Jury Orders Philip Morris To Pay $8M To Widow  

A Ft. Lauderdale jury has ordered Philip Morris to pay more than $8-million to the widow of a chain-smoker.

Six jurors spent Wednesday afternoon deliberating the amount of damages to award in the lawsuit filed by Elaine Hess, whose husband Stuart Hess died in 1997 at age 55 after decades of chain smoking. The award amounts to $1.3 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages against Richmond, Va.-based Philip Morris USA, a unit of Altria Group. Hess's attorneys sought $130 million.

"It wasn't about the money from the beginning," Hess said after the verdict.

CBS4 Reporter Joan Murray reported that Hess added, "I just really hope this can help all the thousands of families who have also suffered."

Jump to full article »

• Philip Morris USA Will Seek Appellate Review of Jury Verdict in Engle Progeny Case 

Philip Morris USA said today it will seek appellate review of a jury verdict awarding $8 million in total damages to the family of a former smoker.

"Today's verdict was the result of an unconstitutional and profoundly flawed trial procedure. Fundamental fairness requires the plaintiff to establish basic liability before a jury can award damages," said Murray Garnick, Altria Client Services senior vice president and associate general counsel, speaking on behalf of Philip Morris USA. "The trial court failed to do that in this case and instead improperly relied on findings by a prior jury in the Engle class action that have no direct connection with the deceased smoker," said Garnick. The Florida Supreme Court decertified the class in Engle but allowed individual former class members to file suit.

Garnick said that this case was the first case tried to verdict since the Florida Supreme Court's decision out of a number of cases brought in Florida federal and state courts relying on the Engle findings. Garnick also said that every federal district court that has addressed the issue has held that reliance on the Engle findings instead of individual proof establishing a claim violates due process. . . .

“We will vigorously defend each of these cases, which will turn on the facts unique to each plaintiff. We do not believe today’s verdict is predictive of outcomes in future cases,” said Garnick. “This case was selected by plaintiffs’ lawyers from among thousands of others to be the first tried presumably because they believed it was their best case,” said Garnick.

Jump to full article »

Altria Must Pay $8 Million in Florida Smoker’s Death (Update3) 

Altria Group Inc., the biggest U.S. cigarette maker, must pay $8 million to the family of a smoker who died of lung cancer, a Florida jury ruled in the first of 8,000 individual cases to go to trial in the state. . . .

“We’re going to file an appeal” of today’s award, said Kenneth Reilly, Altria’s attorney. “We’ll defend it vigorously like we have in all other cases.” . . .

“The jury spoke and gave us justice,” he added.

Hess’s wife, Elaine, stood in a courthouse hallway wiping away tears after jurors handed down their decision. She said she hoped the verdict would send a message to tobacco companies.

“I just hope that all the thousands of other suffering families will also obtain similar justice,” she said. . . .

“We’re delighted that the jury saw through Philip Morris’s attempts to blame the smoker” for his injuries, said Ed Sweda, a senior attorney for the Tobacco Products Liability Project at Northeastern University School of Law in Boston. “We’ll certainly be looking forward to the 8,000 other trials.”

The next case is slated to begin tomorrow in state court in Ft. Lauderdale before Streitfeld.

Jump to full article »

Florida jury awards £5.6 million in tobacco lawsuit  

A Florida jury awarded $8 million (5.6 million pounds) on Wednesday to the widow of a smoker whose death was caused by his addiction to cigarettes in what could be a major legal setback for tobacco giant Philip Morris. . . .

But Alex Alvarez, an attorney for Elaine Hess, said he and other lawyers who worked on the case felt vindicated after winning $5 million in punitive damages on Mrs. Hess' behalf and $3 million in compensatory damages.

"She's a 110-pound elementary school teacher and she went up against Philip Morris, one of the most powerful companies in the world, and won," Alvarez told Reuters. "We have paved the road for these other litigants to come in and seek their day in court as well. We're happy to be able to do that for them."

Jump to full article »

She's a 110-pound elementary school teacher and she went up against Philip Morris, one of the most powerful companies in the world, and won.
Alex Alvarez, an attorney for Elaine Hess.

• Altria Must Pay $8 Million in Florida Smoker’s Death (Update2)  

Altria Group Inc., the biggest U.S. cigarette maker, must pay $8 million to the family of a smoker who died of lung cancer, a Florida jury ruled in the first of 8,000 individual cases to go to trial in the state.

A state court jury in Fort Lauderdale ruled today Altria’s Philip Morris USA unit is liable for $3 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages over Stuart Hess’s 1997 death. The family’s lawyer told jurors during trial that Hess, 55, “choked his life away” smoking the company’s cigarettes from age 15. Altria makes Marlboro and Virginia Slims cigarettes.

The verdict is the first in thousands of lawsuits filed after the Florida Supreme Court threw out a $145 billion punitive-damages verdict awarded by a Miami jury to a statewide class of smokers in 2006. . . .

“We’re going to file an appeal,” said Kenneth Reilly, Altria’s attorney. “We’ll defend it vigorously like we have in all other cases.” . . .

Altria’s lawyers contend Judge Jeffrey Streitfeld is likely to reduce the award because jurors found that Hess didn’t rely on the company’s statements about the safety of cigarettes after May 1982. His family can’t claim damages for that period because he was fully aware of the risks associated with smoking, the lawyers said.

Reilly said that the judge may throw out the punitive damage award and cut the compensatory award down to about $1.2 million, a reduction of 58 percent. That’s the number that jurors assigned to Hess for his share of responsibility for acquiring lung cancer from smoking.

Alex Alvarez, one of the Hess family’s lawyers, countered that “the full $8 million verdict will stand” because jurors found the company intentionally acted in a way that harmed Hess.

Jump to full article »

Widow awarded $8 million in tobacco trial  

Cigarette maker Philip Morris USA must pay $8 million to the widow and son of a Cooper City chain smoker whose 1997 death from lung cancer was the result of his smoking addiction, a Broward jury decided Wednesday.

Philip Morris has vowed to appeal the verdict in the closely watched case.

Locksmith Stuart Hess smoked up to two packs a day for 40 years before he died at age 55. His widow, Elaine, and son, David, sued Philip Morris -- maker of the Benson & Hedges preferred by Stuart Hess -- for concealing the health effects and addictive nature of cigarettes.

The six-member jury decided Philip Morris should pay $5 million in punitive damages, finding that the nation's largest cigarette maker showed a reckless disregard for Stuart Hess' safety.

The verdict included $2 million in compensatory damages for Elaine Hess, 63, for the loss of her husband and her pain and suffering. Her son David, 34, received $1 million in compensatory damages.

Jump to full article »