Philip Morris Hit with $13.8-Million Judgment in Calif. Sick-Smoker Case

Philip Morris Hit with $13.8-Million Judgment in Calif. Sick-Smoker Case
September 1, 2009

News Summary

A Los Angeles jury has ordered tobacco company Philip Morris USA to pay $13.8 million in punitive damages to the daughter of a smoker who died of lung cancer, Bloomberg reported Aug. 25.

The award to the daughter of smoker Betty Bullock, who died in 2003, came after a trial judge reduced an earlier judgment of $28 billion; that award later was canceled by an appeals court and a new trial on punitive damages ordered.

Bullock was a Marlboro smoker for decades and said that ads for the cigarettes helped convince her to smoke. Her lawyer told jurors that Philip Morris had misrepresented the health risks of smoking for half a century.

Philip Morris has not decided whether to appeal the latest judgment. Some jurors on the case wanted to award even more money to Bullock.

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Posted by me on 01 Sep 09 12:09 PM EDT

these tobacco "punishments" are really getting annoying. i don't smoke and i hate big tobacco but come on, who listens to philip morris for health advice? the surgeon general said almost 50 years ago that smoking was bad for you, causes cancer, etc, yet people still smoke and are SURPRISED when they get lung cancer. i just don't get it. you choose to smoke, deal with the consequences. so what now, all the KIDS of people that smoked and died can now sue the tobacco companies and get their big payout?

Posted by Dee on 01 Sep 09 12:56 PM EDT

Well said! The common "you have to die of something, why not from something I enjoy," really becomes eluded when these individuals actually become ill with cancer and whatnot. It's like "DUH!" Weren't you aware of that and probably actually made the above statement? I am not a big fan of Big Tobacco, but for those who smoke, there is not a reason in the world unless you live under a rock somewhere why you shouldn't know and understand the possible consequences of smoking.

Posted by senseless on 01 Sep 09 01:26 PM EDT

It has been proven in courts of law and testified before congress that big tobacco tried to hide practically all of their own research on their own products. Their products sell almost solely based on their addictiveness, not because people want to be "enjoying themselves" in death. Advertising gets people to think about things they wouldn't normally, like maybe trying an addictive drug. Tobacco has killed more Americans than any foreign nation in any war, even all wars. Counterattacking them seems more than fair to me. Sue them hard. I should do my part and sue for the five generations of men in my family that died of lung cancer and/or emphysema from smoking.

Posted by Lemon Drop on 01 Sep 09 01:38 PM EDT

What kind of standard does this set for our children? Go ahead and smoke...die from it, and then your family can sue and get millions of dollars to throw around! "You have to die of something" is right. Might as well make millions off of it too! Glad they're teaching someone a lesson. It sure isn't Phillip Morris who is learning...

Posted by maxwood on 01 Sep 09 07:53 PM EDT

I sympathize with what senseless says, but suing them and making money for lawyers might be counterproductive because it is a negative strategy (even though against negatine itself). A positive strategy is to promote vaporizer, e-cigarette (not one reported fatality in 13 years), long-stemmed one-hitters (25-mg.) and smokeless nicotine administration systems (SNAS). From the $200-billion 1998 settlement money can't $30-billion be spent giving every U.S. smoker a top-of-the-line $600 vaporizer?

Posted by pixxie on 15 Sep 09 06:37 PM EDT

I've seen plenty of Marlboro ads as well as ads for other tobacco brands and i've never smoked a cigarette in my life. Claiming that advertising convinces you to smoke is the lamest excuse i've ever heard. Of course, attractive ads can be tantalizing but ultimately people need to take responsibility for their own behavior. I'm not a fan of Big Tobacco but suing them for the reasons stated in this article is ludicrous.

No Clear Winners in Florida Engle Cases

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Award in Key Tobacco Case

Calif. Court OKs Big Damages Award Against Philip Morris

Judge Throws Out Award in Calif. Tobacco Case

The Cost of Alcopops to Youth and California

National Cancer Institute: State Cancer Legislative Database Program