Independent Pharmacists Against Tobacco Sales
November 7, 2008February 8, 2008 — While the profits of Big Tobacco are hardly ‘up in smoke,’ individuals harmed by the dangerous side effects of cigarettes and other tobacco products are finding restitution through the legal system. State Supreme Courts in California, Oregon, and Florida have ruled in favor of smokers held hostage by the addictive effects of nicotine and misinformation campaigns of the tobacco industry.
决定要求烟草公司菲利普莫里斯公司对行动负责
Nine years in the making, Philip Morris and the entire cigarette industry suffered a major setback as the Oregon Supreme Court reinstated the full punitive damages award from the 1999 Williams lung cancer trial. In the original suit, the Williams Estate was awarded $79.5 million in punitive damages from Philip Morris, a number they contested as being inflated and unfair. The verdict was petitioned by Philip Morris shortly after the standards for punitive damages were modified by the US Supreme Court in State Farm Insurance v. Campbell, 2003.
The Oregon Court of Appeals upheld the original Williams verdict in 2004 and the Oregon Supreme Court did the same in 2006. The US Supreme Court, petitioned shortly after the 2006 Oregon Supreme Court decision, sent the case back to the Oregon Supreme Court in February 2007 to reconsider its decision on the punitive damages. On January 31, 2008, the Oregon Supreme Court rejected Philip Morris’ appeal–upholding the original verdict for the Williams Estate.
俄勒冈州烟草公司的决定遵循加州先例
In 2006, the US Supreme Court upheld a $50 million punitive damage ruling for the widow of California smoker Richard Boeken by denying review of the tobacco company’s appeal. Before the Williams case, this was the largest award upheld by the high court for an individual smoker. Boeken, who died in 2002 at the age of 57, successfully won damages under a 1998 California law that allowed litigation against tobacco companies for making misleading or fraudulent claims in marketing dangerous tobacco-related products.
Previously, Glendale, California, resident Patricia Henley was the first verdict under the changed California law, resulting in a $10.5 million award in 2005. A smoker for 35 years, Ms. Henley at one point changed from smoking “Marlboro Red” to “Marlboro Lights” after calling Philip Morris and being assured that it was “low tar.” Suffering from inoperable lung cancer, Ms. Henley’s case contested that Philip Morris and other tobacco companies acted to suppress proof of the link between smoking and cancer. Philip Morris’ appeals to the California Supreme Court and US Supreme Court were both rejected.
烟草业将在未来几年承担责任
Like the rest of the tobacco industry, this is not the first cigarette lawsuit against Philip Morris. They have previously been held responsible for negligence and common law fraud for knowingly withholding information about the hazardous effects of cigarettes and other tobacco products sold to the general public. Cigarette litigation reached landmark proportions in Engles, a class-action suit brought by citizens of Florida. For the residents of Florida who were sick or had died as a result of smoking, the court held the tobacco industry responsible. The court found:
- 卷烟公司疏忽大意
- 他们的烟草产品有缺陷且具有不合理的危险
- 香烟会让人上瘾
- 卷烟公司合谋隐瞒健康和成瘾信息，目的是让消费者相信错误信息
- 卷烟公司违反明示保证须承担责任
- 吸烟会导致许多可预防的危及生命的疾病
尽管烟草业提出上诉，撤销了 1,450 亿美元的巨额惩罚性赔偿和解协议，但佛罗里达州最高法院认为，针对卷烟制造商的责任是正确的，并适用于诉讼中的所有人。这使得佛罗里达州的个人可以直接对烟草业提起诉讼。
