Jury awarded woman $23b for case against tobacco company

BeerWolf

LINK

I'm completely against smoking, but this is absurd ain't it? People have known smoking's been bad for you for decades, and health surgeons in the US saying so in the 1970s. But your fella's death was in 1996, before the warning labels so that'd be a merit towards her case I suppose...

She's already gotten a $9.3m settlement, this is just beyond pure greed.

This suing nature is just disgusting tbh, people suing for health reasons they know is bad for them and brought it upon themselves... that's like suing McDonalds because a fat fecker eating junk food 24/7 dies from a heart attack...

DrumSteve

That was a jury award, the judge will revise it.

Also she was right, the company tried to lie and get away with it and they were caught out.

shruikan2553

There's a lawyer handing in his notice after that one.

the_monkey

absolute insanity - how can they arrive at such a ridiculous figure ?

darkpagandeath

the_monkey wrote: »

absolute insanity - how can they arrive at such a ridiculous figure ?

No idea, Is compensation not usually figured on loss of earning/earning power and what you could have earned and all that.

DamagedTrax

darkpagandeath wrote: »

No idea, Is compensation not usually figured on loss of earning/earning power and what you could have earned and all that.

if so, she must have had some job! is she bill gates?

mdwexford

So can anyone who had a relative die from smoking sue the tobacco company now?

Quin_Dub

It's not "compensation" as such..

There were 2 parts to the judgement , the Compensation part , which is the one tied to loss of earning , pain, suffering etc...The family got $16.8M for that element.

Then the jury loaded on the $23.6B in "Punitive damages" on top -

Basically it's a fine against the company that is not directly related to the impact to the family - I assume the figure is based on a % of profits/turnover or something of that nature..

floggg

darkpagandeath wrote: »

No idea, Is compensation not usually figured on loss of earning/earning power and what you could have earned and all that.

It was punitive damages - additional damages awarded to punish misbehaviour.

Not really all that common over here.

Delirium

LOL

:pac:

Rothmans

Christ, I think perhaps the jury simply do not understand how much money that is. It's about half of Ireland's annual Revenue take for Christ sake. The mind boggles. It's 23,600 milliom dollars ffs!

There must have been some serious anti-smoking nazis in that jury :pac:

Warper

Thats enough to pay off some countries national debt - NICE

y0ssar1an22

Its ridiculous alright and my opinion is this is more motivated by screwing over a tobacco company, rather than out of sorrow for the victim.

Robbo

Rothmans wrote: »

Christ, I think perhaps the jury simply do not understand how much money that is. It's about half of Ireland's annual Revenue take for Christ sake. The mind boggles. It's 23,600 milliom dollars ffs!

There must have been some serious anti-smoking nazis in that jury :pac:

Tell us more about your fine, safe product good sir...

Quin_Dub

mdwexford wrote: »

So can anyone who had a relative die from smoking sue the tobacco company now?

Only in Florida (not really there are other states as well).

All these cases link back to a Florida Supreme court judgement a few years ago that basically made it easier for people to sue and win vs. Tobacco companies...

The case is one of thousands filed in Florida after the state Supreme Court in 2006 tossed out a $145 billion class action verdict. That ruling also said smokers and their families need only prove addiction and that smoking caused their illnesses or deaths.

Last year, Florida's highest court re-approved that decision, which made it easier for sick smokers or their survivors to pursue lawsuits against tobacco companies without having to prove to the court again that Big Tobacco knowingly sold dangerous products and hid the hazards of cigarette smoking.

So essentially - If you can prove that your family member was addicted to Cigarettes and that they were the cause of death , then that's it.. There's basically nothing the Cigarette firms can offer in defense...

Rothmans

Robbo wrote: »

Tell us more about your fine, safe product good sir...

Still doesn't justify the completely disproportionate award tbf. Compo culture gone mad.

sebastianlieken

Quin_Dub wrote: »

It's not "compensation" as such..

There were 2 parts to the judgement , the Compensation part , which is the one tied to loss of earning , pain, suffering etc...The family got $16.8M for that element.

Then the jury loaded on the $23.6B in "Punitive damages" on top -

Basically it's a fine against the company that is not directly related to the impact to the family - I assume the figure is based on a % of profits/turnover or something of that nature..

$23.6 Billion in punitive damages against the company makes the $16.8 Million compensatory payment seem like a relatively small amaount; $16.8 million is still an absurd amount to be paid in compensation. £16,800,000. yay 'Merica, we sue people because we love our rights! - just ours though, screw everyone else....

darkpagandeath

If you slip on a icy step here you get over 1mill, And you can climb a fence designed to keep people out during a siege you get compo also.

ash23

I'm assuming that there's more to it than that?

For example at the time he started smoking, did the company know that cigarettes were lethal and not inform anyone? If so, I can see how the award was so big.

If the company knew the dangers and continued to advertise their product as being cool and relaxing etc, also allowing young children to buy their product but knowing it will most likely get them addicted and kill them in the long run, then they deserve to be hit financially. And with the worth of most tobacco companies, the amount would have to be substantial in order to affect them.

Lapin

As an Irish citizen I plan to sue Benson & Hedges for €37.65 billion because the health warnings on the pack are written in English and not my native Irish.

An obvious and blatent infringment of my basic human rights and an obvious danger to my health as I choose to ignore warnings in English as it isn't my first language.

I have my rights and I'm gonna sue and be rich rich rich !




EDIT :

Just picked up a pack to light one up in celebration of my masterplan and noticed the health warning are written in English and Irish.

Damn.

Quin_Dub

Rothmans wrote: »

Still doesn't justify the completely disproportionate award tbf. Compo culture gone mad.

Not really "Compo" culture as we complain about here... The family didn't go in asking for anything like that kind of money...

The got what they asked for ,the ~$17M; which if you accept the argument that the cigarettes are at fault ,is not a huge amount for the loss of a husband/father..

The Punitive damages are crazy though... Clearly a few members of the jury decided to showboat a bit and pull a crazy number out of their asses...

That part will spend the next few years in appeals and will be massively reduced...

EDIT :- Found a link , general feeling is that it'll be cut back to about 9X/10X the compensation pay-out or about $150M or so..

Link

gctest50

Rothmans wrote: »

Christ, I think perhaps the jury simply do not understand how much money that is. It's about half of Ireland's annual Revenue take for Christ sake. The mind boggles. It's 23,600 milliom dollars ffs!
.....

just trotting after NASA

The life of the shuttle program has cost $113.7 billion. (Not adjusted for inflation
http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/566250main_SHUTTLE%20ERA%20FACTS_040412.pdf

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

blaze1

Mental, wonder if she will be donating a lump to cancer research as she must hate the disease. Greedy gold digging fcuk.

I'm sueing Diagio as I had a hangover from hell yesterday.

donegal.

he started smoking in 1988. Didn't everybody knew by then that smoking kills?

misread the article - he started in 1973.

BeerWolf

donegal. wrote: »

he started smoking in 1988. Didn't everybody knew by then that smoking kills?

1973*

shruikan2553

Lapin wrote: »

As an Irish citizen I plan to sue Benson & Hedges for €37.65 billion because the health warnings on the pack are written in English and not my native Irish.

An obvious and blatent infringment of my basic human rights and an obvious danger to my health as I choose to ignore warnings in English as it isn't my first language.

I have my rights and I'm gonna sue and be rich rich rich !




EDIT :

Just picked up a pack to light one up in celebration of my masterplan and noticed the health warning are written in English and Irish.

Damn.

They can't expect you to go through the bother of reading the warnings. They should make it clearer. Sue them anyway!

petes

donegal. wrote: »

he started smoking in 1988. Didn't everybody knew by then that smoking kills?

Is that not the point though, the tobacco companies didn't advertise that they were harmful?

It's still nuts!

Guy:Incognito

Quin_Dub wrote: »

The got what they asked for ,the ~$17M; which if you accept the argument that the cigarettes are at fault ,is not a huge amount for the loss of a husband/father..

I don't know. I'd put it as a high figure.


She'd probably have sold him to a backstreet surgeon for parts for a cash offer much lower given the chance.

He chose to start smoking. Even if he didn't know in the beginning I'm sure the fact that they are bad for you came up a couple of times during his life.

RandomName2

blaze1 wrote: »

Mental, wonder if she will be donating a lump to cancer research as she must hate the disease. Greedy gold digging fcuk.

I'm sueing Diagio as I had a hangover from hell yesterday.

You could have won the lotto had your hangover not been so bad that you hadn't been able to buy a ticket.

What's that? About €3 million.

Throw in another half billion for pain and suffering and that sounds about right.

magicbastarder

darkpagandeath wrote: »

No idea, Is compensation not usually figured on loss of earning/earning power and what you could have earned and all that.

punitive damages can be awarded - the famous example being the mcdonald's coffee cup case, where mcdonalds had been repeatedly warned their coffee was too hot.
the award picked by the jury in that case was equal to one day's sales of hot beverages for mcdonalds - as punishment - rather than being linked to the suffering or loss of earnings of the injured party.
the initial award was drastically reduced by a judge, but naturally the media were slower reporting that than they were the initial jury award.

Cienciano

Delighted, hope a few more people do the same. The way Tobacco companies behaved in the past was a disgrace. Still bad, but obviously not as bad.

HurtLocker

Lapin wrote: »

As an Irish citizen I plan to sue Benson & Hedges for €37.65 billion because the health warnings on the pack are written in English and not my native Irish.

An obvious and blatent infringment of my basic human rights and an obvious danger to my health as I choose to ignore warnings in English as it isn't my first language.

I have my rights and I'm gonna sue and be rich rich rich !




EDIT :

Just picked up a pack to light one up in celebration of my masterplan and noticed the health warning are written in English and Irish.

Damn.

We just need a blind smoker. There's no brail. They are targeting the blind . We the people of Ireland could create someone, pretend he's real. Sue for $100billion and sort out the national debt

KungPao

I'd love a nice smoke now...a marlboro red would really hit the spot.

Oh yes.

Pity i quit months ago

Pumpkinseeds

That will probably be tied up in court appeals for years and reduced to a fraction of the original award, minus the lawyers fees and appeals fees there might not be a lot left over when she gets the money, if she ever gets the money.

KahBoom

Punitive damages are not necessarily given to the plaintiff, they are to deter the company.

Here is a detail left out by the article in the OP:

Cynthia Robinson, of Pensacola, sued the cigarette maker in 2008 over the death of her husband, Michael Johnson, claiming the company conspired to conceal the health dangers and addictive nature of its products.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jul/20/chain-smokers-widow-awarded-23bn-in-punitive-damages-in-florida

If the company did conspire to conceal the health dangers and addictive nature of tobacco, then they should be glad if they aren't cratered into the ground, with fines large enough to shut down the company entirely.

Fines like this, should be large enough to seriously threaten the finances and existence of companies, so they are deterred properly.

Qualitymark

Hmmmmmmmmmmm…

If loss of your husband, lover, best friend, co-earner, etc who's become addicted to filthy baccy is worth that much (which of course it is)…

How much could Ireland get from international banks which addicted the country's foolish developers, bankers and politicians to gambling on loans…?

Surely a little precedent here?

StormWarrior

I actually think this was a great settlement. I hope other people sue tobacco companies and get similar amounts so that the tobacco companies all go bust and I will never again have to breathe in any dirty skanks' second-hand smoke.

The Backwards Man

She'll be stung for a fortune in tax on the interest.

/Donegal approach to money.

darkpagandeath

StormWarrior wrote: »

I actually think this was a great settlement. I hope other people sue tobacco companies and get similar amounts so that the tobacco companies all go bust and I will never again have to breathe in any dirty skanks' second-hand smoke.

Yup, then you will only have to breath in all that pollution, car fumes, Perfume, Peoples stinking lunches.

HurtLocker

StormWarrior wrote: »

I actually think this was a great settlement. I hope other people sue tobacco companies and get similar amounts so that the tobacco companies all go bust and I will never again have to breathe in any dirty skanks' second-hand smoke.

Yah because tobacco farmers will stop growing and no one will get the idea of starting a new tobacco firm now protected due to all the health warnings on packs.

KungPao

The Backwards Man wrote: »

She'll be stung for a fortune in tax on the interest.

/Donegal approach to money.

Is that really why they dish out such crazy settlements from private companies? Just so The Man gets a big pay day?