UF Law grad kicks the nuts off of Big Tobacco

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by UFLAW81, Jul 21, 2014.

  1. demosthenes
    Offline

    demosthenes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    7,478
    Likes Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Ratings Received:
    +1,244
    Your understanding of the law is fundamentally lacking. Tort claims do not require a statutory transgression. I'm not going to go through the entire history of common law and its evolution here since there are readily accessible resources for anyone interested. I'm certainly not going to accept your view of the issue when you've shown an inability to grasp the nuances.

    How about this, what is the wrongdoing in this case?
  2. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,229
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    Another example of what is wrong with our legal system and why I carry a personal umbrella policy.

    Lawyers gotta get paid so let's find some reason we can sue because of an accident.

    I get if it can be proven someone purposely set their house up for an accident to happen but cases like this example are why people see many PIP attorneys in such a low light. WRT RJR we are talking about a product for sale that apparently carried a warning from day one for the plaintiffs husband (I feel for her and the family just as I feel for the family who loses a loved one to an alcoholic who gets behind the wheel of a car/I would understand a big payout in that case much more than a case where one chooses to engage in something harmful to themselves). I would think any company wants their product addicting if you are willing to try it from McDonalds to WalMart.

    I don't have an issue with civil suits. But I sometimes wonder about the ethics behind the merit of bringing many of the cases...
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2014
  3. Gatormb
    Offline

    Gatormb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    9,401
    Likes Received:
    386
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Bradenton, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +1,199
    Whoa! Sounds like you're gonna be an expert witness! Kick some ass!
  4. UFLAW81
    Online

    UFLAW81 All Glory to Zarathustra VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    4,217
    Likes Received:
    920
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Trampa
    Ratings Received:
    +3,766
    It didn't carry a warning that they were chemically altering cigarettes to make them more addicting and as a side effect, more toxic. Whats worse, the company executives lied about this under oath. Lied my friend. When company researchers tried to reveal the fraud and perjury they did everything Big T tried everything to ruin them. They were vindicated.
  5. 96Gatorcise
    Offline

    96Gatorcise Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Messages:
    7,545
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Tampa
    Ratings Received:
    +1,759
    shouldn't have to.

    A warning that says CAUSES lung cancer and heart disease, which everyone knows leads to a drawn out, painful death should be warning enough. Addiction is the easy part when DEATH is the end game.

    You are arguing semantics. A warning about diseases that cause death carry more weight than a warning that says these cigs are chemically altered to cause addiction.
    • Winner Winner x 3
  6. philobeddoe
    Offline

    philobeddoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    7,095
    Likes Received:
    136
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +672
    Yepper ...... I won't defend the tobacco industry but sure as hell won't give a smoker that "smoked themselves" to death a pass. As someone else pointed out ..... a boat load of people successfully stopped smoking and lived. Are we going to reward weakness and stupidity all of the time?
    • Like Like x 2
  7. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,229
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    So now it is expected a company post a sign every time they change their product or service slightly?

    Lying under oath is the only thing you have alleged I see a big deal with so far. And if true they should be punished for that. But someone choosing to partake in something is not Big T's problem...

    Do you have evidence that changing their product was illegal? I have asked already and been ignored. But that would be another issue where punishment would be deserving...
  8. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,229
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    This!
  9. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,229
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    If the PIP lawyer seeking the payday graduated from UF then apparently so for the OP...
  10. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,939
    Likes Received:
    654
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,370
    Q - for the record, the tobacco suit is not a "PIP" matter. "PIP" is an acronym for "personal injury protection" coverage, as required under your automobile insurance policy.

    Which is another matter perhaps worth discussing, but doesn't have anything to do with product liability, tort litigation in general, or Plaintiff's attorneys.
  11. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,229
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    Agreed. I should have been more accurate/inclusive and left it at most PI (I think Personal Injury Lawyers would qualify?) attorneys or ones looking for ways to sue for big bucks.

    And I think there are plenty of attorneys that practice in the field of Personal Injury and class action suits that do a noble job...but cases like this just don't do it for me from what I know (and I acknowledge I am certainly ignorant of all the facts).
  12. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,939
    Likes Received:
    654
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,370

    It really is not semantics, when you talk about a level of intentional harm and lying about it, added on top of someone engaging in risky behavior and assuming the underlying risk.

    In fact, the risk is compounded, i.e., made worse and unsafe-ER, by making the risk much more likely to be repeated due to adding enhanced addictive substances to the product by the dispenser of the product and unknown to the user. You can't reasonably assume the risk of engaging in some kind of behavior in using a product provided to you, without actually knowing what you are risking because of enhancements to the product made by the provider. Here, Big Tobacco, did not tell the smokers that they were guinea pigs for enhanced addictive testing, and the methodology to perfect smoking addiction.
  13. demosthenes
    Offline

    demosthenes Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    7,478
    Likes Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Ratings Received:
    +1,244
    You haven't been ignored. It's just that you choose not recognize how a common law legal system works. Of course we can always switch our legal system to a Civil law model if you want to copy "leftist" countries like France, Argentina, Colombia, Sweeden, etc. and quasi Communist countries like Cuba and China.
  14. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,229
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    :rolleyes:

    So did RJR make an illegal product via an illegal process?
  15. GatorBen
    Offline

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,190
    Likes Received:
    629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,477
    It doesn't matter because conduct can be tortious without violating a statute.

    If you think that committing an intentional illegal act is the only time there should be liability, he's right, you're advocating a pure civil law model.
  16. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,229
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    Gotta love the chest thumper that continues to ignore the question on baseless accusations...

    But then again when one thinks $23 billion being awarded to one person because their spouse engaged in an action harmful to them is outrageous....they are choosing to not recognize how a common law legal system works. Or they just have an opinion on what are problems with our legal system.

    But I will continue to wait for the answer. It would help in shaping my opinion on how outrageous this award was...
  17. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,229
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    I see no negligence or an act that is tortious in selling a legal product.
  18. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,229
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    Certainly not to the tune of $23 billion...
  19. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,229
    Likes Received:
    191
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    Mark's Prime Steakhouse makes a killer steak. And that glob of butter certainly makes it more addictive. But good grief I have no plans on suing them if I end up with health issues from eating (Dreamliner would not be called for my expert witness :) ) their large portions with all sorts extras to make it taste better...
  20. GatorBen
    Offline

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,190
    Likes Received:
    629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,477
    If I sell a power saw that is completely legal, but because of a design defect the blade will fly off while in use, that's a tortious act.

    Basically any defective product / product liability case will - including potentially in areas that are also explicitly the subject of regulation such as defective drug cases.

Share This Page