Subscribe-to-CVN-Blog-Graphic-small.png

Openings in Engle Progeny Tobacco Case Focus on Whether Smoker Was Addicted to Nicotine

Posted by Arlin Crisco on Aug 14, 2014 1:40:50 PM

During opening statements in Gore v. R.J. Reynolds, an Engle progeny tobacco suit, Stephen Corr argues that his client's deceased wife developed carotid stenosis because of her addiction to cigarettes. Click here to view opening statements in the case.

Vero Beach, FL— As trial opened in a widower’s Engle progeny suit, opposing counsel debated whether the long-time smoker at the suit’s center was the victim of a tobacco industry conspiracy to hide the dangers of cigarettes, or a woman who chose to smoke despite family pleas to quit. Robert Gore v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

Robert Gore, the widowed husband of Gloria Gore, sued tobacco manufacturers R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris, claiming his wife’s 40-plus-year smoking habit caused her carotid stenosis in the early 1990s and her eventual lung cancer, from which she died in 2000.

Gore’s attorney, Stephen Corr, told jurors that Gloria began smoking at 14, while unaware of the risks, and quickly became addicted, smoking 1-2 packs of cigarettes a day for much of her life. Describing the case in terms of choices, Corr said Gloria was partially responsible for her smoking-related illnesses. However, Corr argued that defendants bore responsibility for their part in covering up evidence of smoking’s dangers while furthering the nicotine addiction of Gloria Gore and other smokers. "Gloria wanted to stop. She tried to stop,” Corr said. “She chose to stop, but her addiction wouldn’t let her.”

However, Robert McCarter, representing Philip Morris, said Gloria Gore enjoyed smoking and chose to continue the habit, despite knowing its dangers. McCarter played portions of videotaped deposition from Robert Gore in which Robert said his wife refused to quit smoking after her father died from smoking-related lung cancer. Gloria "made it clear over the years that Mr. Gore, her doctors, her children, her parents, nobody was going to convince her to quit smoking, because she wanted to smoke," McCarter said.

McCarter also argued Gloria’s carotid stenosis was likely caused by high cholesterol and a family history of heart disease, rather than smoking. “(The plaintiff’s counsel wants) you to believe that cigarette smoking was the cause of Mrs. Gore’s clogged artery,” McCarter said. “But, of course her non-smoking mother, her non-smoking sister, her two non-smoking grandmothers, smoking couldn’t have been the cause of theirs,” McCarter said. Robert Gore must establish that Gloria’s carotid stenosis was caused by smoking because it was the only condition that “manifested” itself by the November 21, 1996 cut-off date for Engle class membership.

Related Information

View on-demand video on the case's Proceedings page.

Read More

Topics: Negligence, Engle Progeny, Mass Torts

Engle Progeny Tobacco Case May Turn On When Smoker Developed Larynx Cancer

Posted by Arlin Crisco on Aug 11, 2014 2:58:33 PM

Read More

Topics: Products Liability, Engle Progeny, Mass Torts

Georgia Judge Rejects Res Judicata Argument in GM's Motion to Dismiss Suit Over Defective Ignition Switch

Posted by Arlin Crisco on Aug 9, 2014 11:34:14 AM

In a hearing on GM's motion to dismiss, Judge Kathryn Tanskley questions defense attorney Brian Sieve. GM argued the Meltons were required to move to set aside a prior judgment before proceeding to rescind a settlement and renew their wrongful death action against GM. Judge Tanskley ultimately rejected GM's motion. Click here to view the clip.

Marietta, GA—An action to rescind a reported $5 million settlement and renew a wrongful death suit against General Motors over a defective vehicle ignition switch will move forward, after a Cobb County State Court Judge rejected defense arguments in their motion to dismiss.

In an unusual Saturday morning hearing, Judge Kathryn J. Tanksley said she would deny a motion to dismiss in Melton v. General Motors after rejecting GM’s contention that the suit was barred by res judicata.

Kenneth and Mary Elizabeth Meltons’ daughter Brooke died in 2010 after her Chevrolet Cobalt struck an oncoming vehicle. The Meltons sued GM and auto dealership Thornton Chevrolet, contending that a faulty GM ignition switch in Brooke’s car shut off its engine while she was driving, causing her to lose control of the vehicle. They settled the claim against GM last year for a reported $5 million. GM subsequently recalled more than 2 million cars over the ignition switch defect. The Meltons then filed to rescind the settlement and renew their claims and argued that GM had lied to them in discovery and concealed knowledge of the defective ignition switch for years. At Saturday's hearing, Lance Cooper, representing the Meltons, contrasted video deposition of GM engineer Ray DeGiorgio's knowledge concerning the defective ignition switch design with subsequent, conflicting evidence in a Congressional inquiry concerning the faulty switches.

However, Brian Sieve, representing GM, argued that, regardless of the fraud claims, the Meltons' current action was barred by res judicata. Sieve contended that the Meltons should have moved to set aside the judgment in the initial action before filing a new complaint.

In a sometimes pointed exchange, Judge Tanksley rejected GM’s contention and said she believed that Georgia law, including the state's law of rescission, did not require the Meltons to submit a formal motion to set aside the prior judgement. Giving “effect to the law and public policy… would be to put the parties back where they originally were and that all has to be played out properly,” Judge Tanksley said. “I don’t think, at this stage, a motion to dismiss can be granted on res judicata.”

Discovery in the action is now slated to proceed, with responses due August 26.

 

Related Information

Read CVN to Cover Saturday Dismissal Hearing in Georgia Wrongful Death Suit Alleging Faulty GM Ignition Switch.

View a clip of Judge Tanskley questioning one of GM's attorneys.

View the full hearing on the Proceedings page.

Read More

Topics: Negligence, Products Liability

Trial Begins in Irimi v. R.J. Reynolds, One of First Post-Robinson Engle Progeny Proceedings

Posted by Arlin Crisco on Aug 8, 2014 3:36:42 PM

Plaintiffs' attorney Scott Schlesinger delivers the opening statement in Irimi v. R.J. Reynolds. The case is among the first Engle progeny suits to come to trial following a record $23.6 billion verdict against tobacco defendants in an Engle case in July. Click here to view the proceedings.

In the first day of trial, opposing counsel painted different narratives of Dale Moyer, the long-time smoker at the heart of Heather Irimi, et al. v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. et al. Plaintiffs’ attorneys described Moyer as a typical, “generic” smoker taken in by a decades-long tobacco conspiracy that led to a variety of health problems, while defense counsel argued that Moyer willingly chose to smoke, despite knowing the risks.

Irimi is one of the first Engle progeny suits to come to trial in the wake of a record $23.6 billion July verdict against the tobacco industry in another Engle suit, Robinson v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. Like many Engle cases, Irimi rests on questions of smoking’s link to Moyer’s health problems and the tobacco industry’s responsibility. Moyer, who smoked for decades, died in 2013 at 83. In the years before his death, he suffered from a variety of health issues, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, skin cancer, parotid cancer, lung cancer, and heart disease.

Scott Schlesinger, representing Moyer’s daughter Heather Irimi and other plaintiff family members, spent the bulk of his two-hour opening statement detailing what he argued was a decades-long tobacco industry cover up of smoking’s dangers while tobacco manufacturers controlled the output of addictive nicotine to boost cigarette sales. “The cigarette is not the product. The cigarette is the package,” Schlesinger said. “Nicotine is the product.”

Schlesinger claimed that Moyer believed the tobacco industry’s claims that filters and “light” cigarettes, varieties touted for their lower tar and nicotine, would be safer, when in fact they were arguably more dangerous. Schlesinger claimed that Moyer opted for cigarettes that were marketed as safer choices over the years, believing the tobacco industry's marketing.

By contrast, Kevin Boyce, representing R.J. Reynolds, painted Moyer as a man who chose to smoke throughout most of his life, despite knowing of smoking’s dangers for several decades. Boyce claimed Moyer’s decision to choose light cigarettes or brands with filters proved that he knew the inherent dangers of smoking. Narrating a timeline of Moyer’s life, Boyce noted that Moyer quit smoking permanently only after he learned of his respiratory problems. “(Moyer) quit smoking successfully the first time he was properly motivated,” Boyce also claimed that Moyer’s decision not to quit smoking earlier was his responsibility. Dale Moyer "was his own man,” Boyce said.

David Woods, representing defendant Lorillard Tobacco Co., supported that argument by quoting Moyer as saying “There is risk in everything.” While acknowledging that smoking causes a variety of health problems including heart disease, emphysema, and COPD, Woods argued that Moyer could have quit smoking years before he did so, potentially sparing many of his medical problems. Woods argued that, while smoking may have been the medical cause of Moyer's health problems, his choice to continue smoking was the legal cause.

However, with their first witness, Robert Proctor, plaintiffs sought to establish that the majority of smokers only continue the habit because of addiction, and that the tobacco industry markets to young smokers to establish that addiction and maintain its customer base. Proctor, a Stanford University professor and author of Golden Holocaust: Origins of the Cigarette Catastrophe and the Case for Abolition, testified that smoking addiction begins when smokers first take up the habit, typically as teenagers. Before proceedings concluded for the day, Proctor detailed evidence that the tobacco industry specifically marketed to young smokers with a variety of cigarette brands, types, and flavors.

Irimi is one of thousands of Engle progeny cases in Florida, which stem from a 2006 Florida Supreme Court decision decertifying Engle v. Liggett Group Inc., a class-action tobacco suit originally filed in 1994. Although the state’s supreme court ruled Engle cases must be tried individually, it found plaintiffs could rely on certain jury findings in the original case, including the determination that tobacco companies had placed a dangerous, addictive product on the market and had conspired to hide the dangers of smoking. However, individual Engle progeny plaintiffs must prove a causal link between smoking and their health problems.

Irimi proceedings will resume on Monday morning.

Read More

Topics: Negligence, Products Liability, Engle Progeny

CVN to Cover Saturday Dismissal Hearing in Georgia Wrongful Death Suit Alleging Faulty GM Ignition Switch

Posted by Arlin Crisco on Aug 7, 2014 11:31:46 AM

Marietta, GA—In a rare Saturday hearing, the parents of a Georgia woman allegedly killed because of a faulty General Motors vehicle ignition switch face a challenge to their attempted rescission of a reported $5 million settlement and the renewal of their wrongful death claim against the automaker.

Cobb County State Court Judge Kathryn J. Tanksley called the August 9 hearing, which CVN will record, to consider GM’s motion to dismiss a suit by Kenneth and Mary Elizabeth Melton, whose daughter Brooke died in 2010 after her Chevrolet Cobalt struck another vehicle. The Meltons contend that a faulty GM ignition switch in Brooke’s car shut off its engine while she was driving, causing her to lose control of the vehicle. GM subsequently recalled more than 2 million cars over the defect, which the automaker has reportedly linked to at least 13 deaths and 54 accidents so far.

Read More

Topics: Negligence, Products Liability, Mass Torts