A widow has been awarded $23.6 billion from R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company as an Escambia County jury found them responsible for her husband dying of lung cancer, as reported by the Pensacola News Journal. The verdict is allegedly one of the biggest ever made against a tobacco company.
The case pitted widower C.R. against R.J. Reynolds in a trial that lasted nearly four weeks and ended after a 15-hour jury deliberation. It was up to C.R.'s attorney, W.G., to convince the jury that R.J. Reynolds failed to inform C.R.'s husband, M.J., that cigarettes cause lung cancer and that nicotine is very addictive.
W.G. said, "I think the jury wanted to make a difference. All the cards were put on the table to show how the tobacco industry lied and failed to disclose information that could have saved lives, and that's what the jury ruled on in this case."
M.J. died of lung cancer in 1996 after developing an addiction to cigarettes. He had tried several times to quit his habit but failed. W.G. added, "That's a long journey to justice…they'll appeal because they always appeal. That's the attitude they have. But no matter how the ball bounces with the appeal, it's not the money that's important in this case."
C.R. originally added her complaint in with a class action case, the well-known Engle verses Liggett Group Inc. The jury awarded over $145 billion to a group of plaintiffs that represented families nationwide that had lost loved ones, or they themselves were afflicted with a smoking-related disease.
The Florida Supreme Court overturned the ruling in 2006. However they did allow single plaintiffs to file single suits – and to use the Engle jury findings to argue their cases. The Engle jury had found that smoking causes cancer, nicotine is additive, and that tobacco companies sold both defective and unreasonably dangerous cigarettes. C.R. filed her suit anew in 2008.
In a statement, the vice president and assistant general counsel to R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company said that C.R.'s award was "grossly excessive and impermissible under state and constitutional law… This verdict goes far beyond the realm of reasonableness and fairness, and is completely inconsistent with the evidence presented. We plan to file post-trial motions with the trial court promptly, and are confident that the court will follow the law and not allow this runaway verdict to stand."
W.G. said that the point of the lawsuit was to save young people from the same influx of cigarette advertising that bombarded the older generations. W.G. commented, "If we don't get a dime, that's okay, if we can make a difference and save some lives."