Mrozek v. R.J. Reynolds (Jacksonville, Florida). 

The jury that awarded $6M in compensatory damages to the children of deceased smoker Jackie Miller added another $11.3M in punitive damages, for a total damage award of $17.3M against Lorillard Tobacco, which was the only defendant in the trial. The award was also the highest in an Engle-progeny tobacco trial so far in 2011.

Terrell Hogan’s Angelo Patacca described to the jury during the punitive phase closing argument the ways in which Lorillard provided ads that were factually accurate yet nonetheless omitted enough information to mislead consumers as to the underlying truth. Mr. Patacca also cited examples of the Tobacco industry’s attempt to undermine the Surgeon’s General’s efforts to accurately communicate the dangers of cigarette smoking. Mr. Patacca suggested that an additional $18M in punitive damages would be an appropriate punitive damages award: an additional $6M each to recognize the harm, punish the misconduct, and deter future misbehavior. Or, alternately, $6M each for what they knew, when they knew it, and what they did with the information.

In his closing on behalf of Lorillard, Shook Hardy Bacon’s Dan Molony told the jury that Lorillard had already learned its lesson, and has been moving in the right direction for a decade. Further, said Mr. Molony, there was no need to be “heard” by Lorillard because the jury’s prior $6M verdict and compensatory damages award had been heard. “Whacking Lorillard again and again isn’t necessary,” said Mr. Molony. “We’ve been whacked already by your verdict. To do so, I would submit, serves no real purpose. And ladies and gentlemen, punishment without a purpose should not be permitted in this court. Punishment without purpose isn’t justice — it’s revenge. The message I respectfully suggest that you should send with your verdict…is to tell them: Step up to the plate, take responsibility for your actions, and by doing so you’ll be treated fairly. You won’t be whacked again and again and again for the same thing.“

In his closing rebuttal, Mr. Patacca reviewed for the jury some of the reasons why the jury might doubt that Lorillard had learned its lessons and was a different company. “I would submit to you,” said Mr. Patacca, “that you have no evidence to suggest — other than being regulated and told what to do — there have been no changes in the mentality and the intent of the company. The only difference is now they want to be applauded because they follow the law.“

CVN webcast Mrozek v. R.J. Reynolds live.

Mrozek v. Lorillard (Jacksonville, FL).

Tobacco plaintiffs won again in Florida today when a Jacksonville jury sent the Jackie Miller tobacco trial into a punitive damages phase by finding in favor of the plaintiff on all questions, and awarding $2M to each of Ms. Miller’s three children, Michelle Mrozek, Robert Miller, and Malia Torgenson, for a total compensatory damage award of $6M.

In his closing rebuttal argument, Terrell Hogan’s Angelo Patacca repeatedly challenged Lorillard’s claim that it had cooperated with health authorities in warning the public about the hazards of smoking, and that its relationship with Ms. Miller was a typical manufacturer-customer relationship, even if its products were dangerous.

The jury assigned 65% of the fault to Lorillard, and found by clear and convincing evidence that punitive damages were warranted.

The punitive damages phase began immediately, and was completed today. The question of punitive damages is now with the jury.

CVN is webcasting Mrozek v. Lorillard live.

Mrozek v. Lorillard (Jacksonville, Florida).

Jackie Miller v. Lorillard Tobacco involves Jacqueline (“Jackie”) Miller, who was born in 1930 and died in 1994 of lung cancer at the age of 63. Ms. Miller began smoking in high school, in the 1940′s, twenty years before warnings were placed on cigarette packages. Ms. Miller mostly smoked the Lorillard cigarette brands Old Gold, Kent, and Max. The case was brought by Jackie Miller’s daughter, Michelle Mrozek.

According to plaintiff attorney Bruce Anderson, of Terrell Hogan, Ms. Miller smoked constantly, in the morning, at work, before going to bed, in the middle of the night, in the car, in the house, outside– anywhere and everywhere that should could. “We even know that in the last days of Jackie’s life,” said Mr. Anderson, “that she’s suffering from terminal cancer in 1994…the last weeks of her life, she’s still smoking cigarettes. She even has her daughterin-law, who’s not a smoker, puffing smoke into her face when she’s too weak to lift a cigarette and smoke herself. That’s how addicted she was.”

 Mr. Anderson told the jury, “Jackie Miller bears some measure of responsibility for smoking the cigarettes that caused her to suffer lung cancer…she made a bad choice to start smoking in high school, she showed weakness for her failure to stop smoking sooner, to make a greater effort to stop smoking later in life…she’s clearly partially responsible for her own death…[but] Lorillard Tobacco Company also made choices. They made intentional choices…that were influenced by money…Jackie’s fault combined with Lorillard’s fault caused her to suffer cancer.”

For Lorillard, Shook Hardy Bacon’s Dan Molony suggested to the jury that they consider who was in control of Ms. Miller’s smoking, who controlled Ms. Miller’s determination to quit, and whether Ms. Miller was so addicted that she lost her free will? “The evidence will show, I will submit to you,” said Mr. Molony, “that Ms. Miller enjoyed smoking, and she enjoyed it from the beginning until almost the end of her life.“

Morever, said Mr. Molony, Lorillard’s actions did not have a substantial impact on Ms. Miller’s decision to smoke. “The evidence that shows a connection directly between my client and the late Ms. Miller will extend no further than that of a typical manufacturer and customer relationship.”

CVN webcast Mrozek v. R.J. Reynolds live.