With more than 3,000 tobacco cases waiting for their day in court in the Jacksonville Division of the U.S. Middle District of Florida, the court recently heard motions in reference to eight cases that both plaintiff and defense counsel agreed were ready for trial.
U.S. District Judge Roy Dalton Jr. heard motions regarding tobacco, or Engle progeny, cases for most of the day Dec. 13 as the plaintiff and defense counsel prepare for trial.
“The court is concerned with the inadequacies of claims for punitive damages,” said Dalton, speaking to the plaintiffs’ counsel.
“We would welcome the opportunity to amend to address your honor’s concerns,” said Robert Nelson, a plaintiffs’ attorney.
“The thought was that these cases were ready to go, but we are not finding that this is the case,” said Dalton.
The defendants’ motion for summary judgment of each plaintiff’s claims for punitive damages was taken under advisement by Dalton initially at the hearing, but denied in a Dec. 20 order. The defendants were counsel for tobacco companies.
The court heard 34 motions during a hearing that began at 9:32 a.m. and ended at 4:16 p.m. with a break for lunch.
The Engle progeny cases began as a class action suit filed in May 1994, which claimed that the members of the class had been harmed by their cigarette usage.
The class included an estimated 100,000 smokers who claimed they were turned into nicotine addicts by a tobacco industry that did not warn them of the risks.
The class action was certified in 1994, but the courts later determined only Florida smokers could be included.
Dr. Howard Engle was the lead plaintiff and the suit went to trial in 1998. The plaintiffs won a jury verdict in 2000, but the Florida Third District Court of Appeal overturned the verdict in May 2003.
It stated that the group was too disparate to have been certified as a class because its members had started and continued to smoke for disparate reasons and that the punitive damage award was excessive.
The Florida Supreme Court decertified the group, but it allowed each of the class members, known as the “Engle progeny,” to file lawsuits on an individual basis.
The Jacksonville Division of the U.S. District court also heard a number of Daubert motions. The Daubert Standard is a method the courts use to determine if expert testimony is admissible.
Dalton was concerned with expert testimony describing the actions and habits of a plaintiff that is deceased.
“Getting into the head of a decedent to determine what they were addicted to concerns me,” said Dalton. “That would be tough for the jury to overcome.”
Dalton issued an order Dec. 20 addressing motions, including these addressing Daubert motions:
• The defendants’ motion to exclude evidence or argument concerning the use of ammonia compounds in cigarettes pursuant to Daubert is denied.
• Defendants’ motion to exclude evidence or argument concerning the use of additives in cigarettes pursuant to Daubert is denied.
• Lorillard’s motion to exclude evidence or argument concerning the use of ammonia compounds in cigarettes pursuant to Daubert is denied.
• Defendants’ motion to exclude the addiction opinion of Dr. Peter Pitocchi pursuant to Daubert is granted.
356-2466
Tobacco cases: U.S. District Court, Jacksonville Division
Aycock v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al.
3:09-cv-10928-J-37JBT
Denton v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al.
3:09-cv-10036-J-37JBT
Duke v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al.
3:09-cv-10104-J-37JBT
Gollihue v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al.
3:09-cv-10530-J-37JBT
Pickett v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al.
3:09-cv-10116-J-37JBT
Starling v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al.
3:09-cv-10027-J-37JBT
Walker v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al.
3:09-cv-10598-J-37JBT
Young v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al.
3:09-cv-11895-J-37JBT