Last year, CVN cameras captured 40 Engle progeny trials, with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake in tobacco litigation involving some of the nation’s best attorneys. The high-stakes cases are among thousands that stem from a Florida class action suit that the state’s high court ultimately decertified, allowing individual plaintiffs to rely on the original class action’s jury findings and recover damages if a plaintiff proves that the smoker at the heart of their case suffered from nicotine addiction that led to a smoking-related disease.

CVN’s Engle Plaintiff’s Attorney of 2016 distinguished himself with an undefeated record and more than $80 million in damages awarded on the year.

Stock image.

West Palm Beach, FL—A Florida appellate court this week cut a pair of Engle awards against the country’s two biggest tobacco companies, after concluding the trial judge in each case erred in not reducing their compensatory damages.

Bob Shields delivers his closing argument on behalf of Mary Faricy-Pardue, who sued R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris for the death of her husband, John "Jack" Faricy, a long-time smoker who developed heart and respiratory disease. Jurors awarded more than $19 million in the case. 

Gainesville, FL—A Florida jury slapped R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris with more than $19 million in damages for the role it found the cigarette makers played in the death of a former University of Florida professor. Faricy-Pardue v. R.J. Reynolds, 2014-CA-2010.

Frank Kelly delivers his closing arguments at trial against R.J. Reynolds and Kelly's client, Philip Morris, over respiratory disease suffered by Paul Dubinsky, a smoker for more than 35 years. 

Mounting a strong defense in a trial's punitive phase can be daunting. A defense attorney is often faced with convincing jurors that the defendant they just found committed wrongdoing egregious enough to warrant harsh punishment has actually changed enough to mitigate that same punishment. King & Spalding's Ursula Henninger met that task by turning the tables on the idea that a tobacco giant only had an eye for profits.  Martin v. Philip Morris, et al., 2007-CV-036440.