PHAI Online - The Public Health Advocacy Institute
Archive for the ‘tobacco’ Category
All Parties Seek Supreme Court Review of Racketeering Trial: US v. Philip Morris
Friday, February 19th, 2010
Review could open door for substantial remedies that would help smokers to quit protect kids from starting –
and could force the cigarette companies to pay hundreds of billions of dollars
Today the Solicitor General of the United States filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States seeking review of a 2-1 pre-trial ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. That ruling strictly limited the remedies available to the district court judge when she found that the cigarette industry engaged in racketeering in 2006. The Petitioners largely agree with the dissent in that decision that would permit the District Court more leeway in fashioning an appropriate set of remedies.
The pre-trial ruling for which the United States seeks review rejected the proposed remedy under the civil provisions of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) seeking forfeiture of the cigarette industry’s ill-gotten gains flowing from sales to children. It also limited other potential remedies that often available to the judiciary unless they were clearly “forward looking” and carefully tailored to prevent future RICO violations.
In 2005, when it appeared that political concerns in the Department of Justice might be interfering with the prosecution of the trial, the district judge approved a number of public health groups to join as parties to the action. Led by Tobacco Free Kids Action Fund, they too are seeking Supreme Court review of the pre-trial decision and are seeking public health remedies that could have a greater impact on tobacco control.
Philip Morris, as expected, is seeking review of the district court’s decision that found that the cigarette companies were liable under RICO. The other cigarette industry defendants are likely to appeal independently.
Mark Gottlieb, Director of the Tobacco Products Liability Project at Northeastern University School of Law in Boston said: “The Solicitor General’s Petition is enormously important because it could result in a second opportunity for the District Court to mete out justice with a fuller option of remedies in its arsenal. These could include disgorgement of ill-gotten gains; industry-funded cessation programs; counter-marketing; and many other remedies.”
Edward L. Sweda, Jr., Senior Attorney for the Tobacco Products Liability Project noted that: “Freed from the constraints of the pre-trial decision by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, the District Court would be able to reshape the public health landscape around cigarettes and prevent future violations of RICO.”
See more on the case and trial here.
PHAI Senior Attorney Christopher Banthin discussed low tobacco control funding on WCVB News
Thursday, December 10th, 2009
Although uncredited in the clip, PHAI Senior Staff Attorney and Director of the Tobacco Control Resource Center, Christopher Banthin, discusses the public health impact of Massachusetts’ low funding commitment to tobacco control. He is responding to a report issued by the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids on the Tobacco Settlement, 11 years later.
VIDEO: State Spends Less On Tobacco Prevention Programs, Report Says (WCVB-Boston 12/9/09)
PHAI’s Tobacco Products Liability Project is mentioned in NY Times editorial
Monday, November 30th, 2009
A November 27, 2009 editorial entitled A Big Loss for Big Tobacco, stated:
Last week’s $300 million verdict, which could still be reversed or reduced on appeal, provides a strong incentive for others to sue.
Big awards can send a message to the tobacco industry, or be regarded as simply a cost of doing business. Mark Gottlieb, director of the Tobacco Products Liability Project, says more class-action suits are needed, with settlements requiring the industry to finance effective counter-marketing. State settlement money pays for the hard-hitting “truth” campaign, a nationwide effort that aims to discourage young people from smoking.
While it is always nice to be mentioned an the editorial pages of a prestigious paper, what is really important is that jurors are more frequently having the opportunity to learn about the conduct of cigarette companies and, through the civil justice system, send the message that it is unacceptable.
Tobacco Products Liability Project hails $244 million punitive damages award against Philip Morris as “entirely proportionate to the level of reprehensible misconduct by the company”
Friday, November 20th, 2009
A Fort Lauderdale, Florida jury on the afternoon of November 19, 2009 returned a nearly $300 million dollar ($55 million in compensatory damages and $244 million in punitive damages) verdict against tobacco giant Philip Morris in the trial of Naugle vs. Philip Morris. The three-week trial featured the testimony of the plaintiff, Luncinda (Cindy) Naugle, who started smoking in 1968 at the age of 20 and who quit smoking in 1993. Ms. Naugle now suffers from severe emphysema. She is represented by the Kelley Uustal Law Firm in Fort Lauderdale. [Contact Attorney Bob Kelley at 954-522-6601.]
Edward L. Sweda, Jr., Senior Attorney for the Tobacco Products Liability Project (TPLP) at Northeastern University School of Law in Boston, was delighted with the jury’s verdict. “Clearly, this jury recognized the outrageous and reprehensible misconduct by Philip Morris and appropriately expressed its outrage by awarding $244,000,000 in punitive damages. This jury went far beyond a slap on the wrists and, instead, hit Philip Morris hard in order to punish the company for its extraordinary wrongdoing and to deter Philip Morris and other tobacco companies from committing similar wrongdoing in the future,” Sweda said.
Mark Gottlieb, TPLP’s Director, noted that “trial lawyers should be encouraged by the success that plaintiffs in Florida have been able to achieve when juries have had the chance to review the evidence of cigarette makers’ astonishing misconduct.”
Thursday’s verdict was the tenth verdict this year in Engle progeny cases in Florida. 8 out of those 10 verdicts have been for the plaintiffs; the jury verdict in the Naugle case was the largest of the eight plaintiff verdicts. Thousands of other Engle progeny cases remain in the pipeline, awaiting trial in Florida.
– 30 –
The Tobacco Products Liability Project (TPLP) is a project of the Public Health Advocacy Institute, which is based at Northeastern University School of Law in Boston.
PHAI submits comments to FDA supporting reducing nicotine levels of smoked tobacco products to non-addictive levels
Tuesday, September 29th, 2009
In response to a request for comments, PHAI urges the FDA to prioritize smoked tobacco nicotine reduction as a potentially highly effective tool to mitigate the public health cost of smoking. Please see our complete Comments (pdf).
PHAI Publishes Issue Briefs on Tobacco Industry’s Corporate Makeover
Friday, May 8th, 2009
The Public Health Advocacy Institute, supported by the American Legacy Foundation, has completed a year of research on the tobacco industry’s attempted corporate makeover, and has created five issue briefs on the topic. A 60 minute Webinar was broadcast on May 11, 2009 and is archived HERE. They highlight various aspects of the tobacco industry’s use of corporate social responsibility rhetoric and tactics to attempt to rehabilitate its image and fend off tobacco control activism. These briefs each contain issues, the evidence and possible messages for State Tobacco Control Programs to use in their interventions and counter-marketing campaigns, and to generate support for future interventions. The issue briefs can be used effectively to denormalize the tobacco companies and better understand the motives behind their corporate makeover attempts.
- Download Webinar Archive (approximately 1 hour – requires Windows Media Player)
Issue Brief Topics:
- Corporate Social Responsibility Overview
- Manipulating Science
- Manipulating the Press
- Manipulating the Public and Regulators
- Youth Smoking
All briefs are in PDF format. 
The Weakening of RICO’s Remedies Provision: Analysis of the Appeals Court’s Decision in USA v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al.
Tuesday, January 22nd, 2008
This white paper analyzes the equitable remedies provision of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) as it was interpreted by both the trial and appeals courts in the Department of Justice’s civil RICO case against the major United States cigarette manufacturers. It demonstrates how the appeals court’s decision, which bound the trial court, severely affected the remedies that could be ordered in that case — despite the judge’s conclusion that the defendants are racketeers. It argues that RICO’s equitable remedies provision needs to be clarified and strengthened so that it can be used most effectively to promote public health.
Potential Master Settlement Agreement Violations Evidenced in Judge Kessler’s Findings in USA v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al.
Thursday, January 17th, 2008
This practice guide examines the court’s lengthy 2006 decision in the U.S. Department of Justice’s racketeering suit against the major American cigarette manufacturers. It highlights the numerous actions of these manufacturers cited in that opinion that may constitute violations of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement, and it calls for enforcement actions to remedy such violations.
A Guide for Plaintiffs’ Attorneys: Using Findings and Resources from USA v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al. in Future Claims Against Big Tobacco
Thursday, January 17th, 2008
PHAI has published this practice guide to help plaintiffs’ attorneys understand the some of the value of the judge’s decision in the U.S. Department of Justice’s racketeering suit against the major American cigarette manufacturers for private practice. It highlights the ways in which attorneys may use this opinion in their future claims against “big tobacco” while pointing out areas in which its use may be problematic. It also provides a helpful list of online resources related to the case.
PHAI Submits Brief on Behalf of AMA and others to U.S. Court of Appeals for DC Circuit in Tobacco Racketeering Appeal
Tuesday, December 4th, 2007
PHAI Amicus Brief on Behalf ot the AMA and others in Appeal of RICO case: Last year, a federal judge found the tobacco industry liable for violating RICO, the federal anti-racketeering statute, in a case filed against the industry by the United States Government. An appeal is pending in the U.S Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.PHAI, on behalf of itself, the American Medical Association, the American College of Physicians, the American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons, the American Thoracic Society, Society for Thoracic Surgeons, and Mississippi State Medical Association filed an amicus brief arguing that tobacco companies continue to misinform and deny responsibility for the harm their products cause. Therefore, two remedies proposed at trial but not adopted by the trial court should be implemented: 1) an education and counter-marketing program; and 2) youth smoking reduction targets. By setting up a program to correct misinformation and penalties for the industry if it fails to reduce youth smoking, the opportunities for further violations of the RICO statute by the tobacco industry will be reduced.
