Court Rules Against Tobacco Companies
Court Alerts
The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a tobacco industry request to intervene in a lawsuit by over a thousand West Virginia smokers.
The justices declined to examine a trial procedure in which a jury first determines whether smokers as a group are entitled to punitive damages before establishing whether any single smoker is entitled to compensation.
Later, a new jury addresses issues unique to each alleged smoking victim who sued.
West Virginia courts are allowing the approach, which has been used in other types of lawsuits, including claims for asbestos exposure.
The second phases of such trials rarely occur, because the two sides usually settle once they know the value of the case.
Tobacco companies oppose use of the legal device, which lawyers call "reverse bifurcation."
The tobacco industry said a jury doesn't know until later in a case whether any smoker was actually harmed or how serious any injury was; which defendants if any were responsible; or the amount of compensatory damages any defendant owes to smokers.
In addition to helping resolve suits over asbestos exposure, reverse bifurcation has been applied to claims against makers of the dangerous diet drug fen-phen.
In asking the justices not to take the case, lawyers for the smokers said further delay would mean that most of their clients would die before their cases could be tried, "thus affording the defendants a free pass" for their alleged misconduct.
The smokers say the companies secretly agreed not to market a truly safer cigarette while publicly proclaiming the safety of their own particular brands.
The first phase of the trial was scheduled to begin March 18.
The case is Philip Morris USA v. Accord, 07-806.
Related listings
-
Court Rules Against Tobacco Companies
Court Alerts 02/25/2008The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a tobacco industry request to intervene in a lawsuit by over a thousand West Virginia smokers.The justices declined to examine a trial procedure in which a jury first determines whether smokers as a group are enti...
-
Court victory for correction officers reversed
Court Alerts 02/24/2008A federal appeals court has reversed a correction officers union's U.S. District Court win against Nassau County, saying the lag payroll procedure imposed on the union members by county officials did not violate the Constitution. The decision Friday ...
-
Supreme Court allows prosecution of NASSCOM chief
Court Alerts 02/22/2008The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed the prosecution of Chief of the National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM), Som Mittal, for not providing adequate security to a female employee who was raped and murdered in 2005. “If you ...
Is Now the Time to Really Call a Special Education Lawyer?
IDEA, FAPE, CHILD FIND and IEPs: The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees all children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE starts with a school’s responsibility to identify that a child has a disability (Child Find) and create an Individualized Education Program (IEP) to suit the needs of the child.
Forte Law Group is one of only a very few law firms within the state of Connecticut that is dedicated to exclusively representing families and children with special needs.
Parents need to be persistent, dedicated and above all else aware of the many services and accommodations that their child is entitled to under the law. As early as this point within your child’s special education, many parents will often find themselves in the situation asking, “is now the time to really call a special education lawyer?” Here are a few things to consider when asking yourself that question.