The jury in Piendle v. R.J. Reynolds returned a punitive damages verdict of $180K against R.J. Reynolds, and $90K against Philip Morris. The compensatory damages award in Phase 1 was $4M. The total punitive damages award, $270K, was approximately two orders of magnitude lower than the amount the plaintiff had suggested, and lower, even, than the $900K that the defense had suggested, if the jury believed that punitive damages were warranted.
Topics: Toxic Torts, Products Liability, Engle Progeny, Tobacco Litigation, Piendle v. RJ Reynolds
"Today we're here to decide how much -- how much -- these defendants should be punished," Searcy Denney's Greg Barnhart told the jury in closing the punitive damages phase of Piendle v. R.J. Reynolds.
Topics: Toxic Torts, Products Liability, Engle Progeny, Tobacco Litigation, Piendle v. RJ Reynolds
At the start of the punitive damages phase, the Piendle v. R.J. Reynolds jury heard from former tobacco CEO Robert Heimann by video from a deposition taken in December, 1986. Mr. Heimann testified as to American Tobacco Company's conclusion that cigarettes were not injurious to health, and as to the research underlying this conclusion. Mr. Heimann testified that the surgeon general was "dead wrong" in concluding that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer, and that a long list of health organizations denouncing cigarette smoking as hazardous were all wrong, even though he could not name any organization that had concluded otherwise.
Topics: Products Liability, Engle Progeny, Tobacco Litigation, Piendle v. RJ Reynolds
The jury in Piendle v. R.J. Reynolds found that Charlie Piendle's addiction to cigarettes was the legal cause of his death, and awarded $4M in compensatory damages to his widow, Margaret Piendle. The jury apportioned 45% fault to Mr. Piendle, and 27.5% fault each to R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris. The jury also found that punitive damages were warranted, and the trial will move to the punitive damages phase.
Topics: Toxic Torts, Products Liability, Engle Progeny, Tobacco Litigation, Piendle v. RJ Reynolds
In his closing argument, Jones Day's Peter Biersteker reminded the jury in Piendle v. Reynolds, "It would be very easy for you to forget during Mr. Barnhart's closing that this case is about Mr. Piendle...and the choices he made, and make no mistake about it: they were choices."
Topics: Products Liability, Engle Progeny, Piendle v. RJ Reynolds
