WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court grappled Tuesday with whether to allow a $79.5 million verdict against a cigarette company, a case that business groups are pointing to in asking the justices to clamp down on large damage awards.
Mayola Williams was in the crowded courtroom to hear the justices discuss the judgment that an Oregon jury imposed against Altria Group Inc.’s Philip Morris USA in connection with the death of her husband, Jesse.
A two-pack-a-day smoker of Marlboros for 45 years, Jesse Williams died of lung cancer nine years ago. Mayola Williams followed through on a promise she said she made to her husband and sued Philip Morris, which makes Marlboros, for fraud. She won.
Her lawyer, Robert Peck, told the justices they could uphold her $79.5 million punitive damage award without overturning prior rulings that limited punitive damages. Such damages are money intended to punish a defendant for its behavior and to deter a repeat of the actions. The earlier cases did not involve personal injury.
The jury award was appropriate because it is punishing Philip Morris’ misconduct for a decades-long “massive market-directed fraud” that misled people into thinking cigarettes were not dangerous or addictive, Peck said.
Philip Morris’ lawyer, Andrew Frey, said a jury can punish the company only for the harm done to Williams, not to other smokers. The jury should have been told explicitly that other smokers, no matter how tragic their stories, would have to prove their own cases, Frey said.
The Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers and trade associations representing car and drug makers have weighed in on behalf of tighter restrictions on damage awards.
The case also is being watched closely as a test of whether the new makeup of the Supreme Court will lead to changes in its prior rulings limiting punitive damages.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
