BULLOCK v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC PART II
Substantial evidence supported findings that cigarette manufacturer made intentional misrepresentations and false promises to consumers where witnesses testified without contradiction that defendant publicly denied all allegations that its products were harmful and contended that independent research supported its denials, while in fact defendant knew that there was no valid scientific controversy concerning the adverse health effects of smoking, carefully avoided conducting or sponsoring research that might reveal the health hazards of smoking and concealed the results of research conducted overseas on its behalf, and sought to maintain the false controversy and to make its cigarettes more addictive to increase sales. Plaintiff was not required to show must prove that she heard and actually relied on a specific representation. Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1969, while preempting claims "based on smoking and health," did not preempt plaintiff's fraud related claims and did not bar admission of evidence of defendant's post 1969 advertising that was probative on the intent to defraud and reliance elements of plaintiff's nonpreempted claims. While FCLA precludes liability for punitive damages for targeting of underage smokers subsequent to act's effective date, it does not do so with regard to prior conduct, so instruction that would have precluded liability for punitive damages based on youth targeting activities regardless of date was erroneous and was properly rejected. Defendant was entitled to new trial on punitive damages where trial court erroneously rejected proposed instruction barring jurors from imposing punitive damages on basis of harm done to persons other than plaintiff.
Comments on BULLOCK v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC PART II