|
Florida Tobacco Cases Complicated by Federal Courts
By Lily Garza
September 17, 2008
Federal judges across Florida have complicated thousands of lawsuits filed by smokers after reinterpreting decisions made by the Florida Supreme Court.
In 2000 a Miami jury had found a link between 23 illnesses caused by smoking and industry behavior. The jury concluded that cigarette makers withheld important information about the risks associated with their products and put unreasonably dangerous products on the market. However, the state's Supreme Court broke up the statewide class action, but allowed plaintiffs to file suits individually. U.S. District Judge Ursula Ungaro of the Southern District of Florida ruled August 8 that the plaintiffs could still use the jury findings in future personal injury law suits against tobacco companies.
Less than a month later, on Aug. 28, a U.S. District Judge for the Middle District of Florida in Jacksonville, Judge Harvey Schlesinger rejected Ungaro's ruling and the jury's findings. Schlesinger sided with tobacco company representatives who claim that the jury's findings were "too general" and could not be applied to each individual case. A Tampa judge followed Schlesinger's example and backed his ruling the same day.
Edward Sweda Jr., a senior attorney for the anti-smoking group, the Tobacco Products Liability Project, said he thought the new developments were "troubling," according to the Daily Business Review.
In January over 8,000 smokers met a deadline to file individual suits using the Miami jury's findings to back their cases. The use of the jury's ruling was part of an agreement reached after the court threw out a $145 billion verdict and broke up the class action suit known as Engle v. Leggett, which was originally filed in 1994. State and federal courts have been wrestling with how to deal with the Engle progeny since then. About 4,000 cases are currently in federal court dealing with this issue.
Schlesinger ruled that the state of Florida violated the U.S. Constitution by not giving the tobacco industry due process.
"This court will not sacrifice the fundamental right of due process upon the altars of expediency, thrift and 'pragmatism,'" he wrote.
Plaintiffs' attorneys are concerned about the trickle-down effect of Schlesinger's ruling, saying that it might weaken the power of the Florida Supreme Court. Schlesinger is already expecting his ruling to be challenged. He referred his ruling to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
"The Florida Supreme Court is the apex judicial system in the state of Florida, and its rulings are binding," said Miles McGrane of McGrane Nosich & Ganz in Coral Gables, Fla, "This is typical of the tobacco industry. If they don't like what they get, they find some other court."
Most lawyers agree that it is unclear exactly what the effect of Schlesinger's ruling will be but believe it is likely that the issue will end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.
|
