MIAMI – A jury on Monday decided not to impose cigarette maker Philip Morris with a punitive damage award evidently agreeing with a contention by defense attorneys, that the company should not be punished for mistakes of the past.
The clerk of the court read the verdict, “What is the amount (punitive damages)? Zero.”
The jury last week awarded $2.5 million in compensation damages to the widow of Ulysee Holliman for pain, suffering and loss, from the tobacco smoking addiction that caused Holliman’s death from lung cancer in 1993. Plaintiff attorneys had originally asked for $8 million in compensation.
During the trial attorneys for Philip Morris had countered that Holliman knew the dangers of smoking and continued to smoke anyway, a decision that he was personally responsible for.
The jury found the cigarette maker 50 percent to blame for what happened and Holliman 50 percent at fault.
The trial in the Dade County Court is being streamed live courtesy of Courtroom View Network.
Last week’s compensation verdict allowed Holliman to join a class of Florida residents who sued the tobacco companies in 1994.
Monday’s hearing was to decide if punitive damages should be awarded to punish the cigarette maker for its behavior. Plaintiff attorneys argued that Philp Morris officials and those of other cigarette makers had engaged in a continuing campaign of deception to fool the public about the dangers of smoking addiction, including the targeting of teenagers using false advertising in what amounted to a conspiracy.
Defense attorneys for Philip Morris said the company had changed its ways from the past and asked if a punitive damage amount had to be levied; it should be for $250,000, not the $12.5 million attorneys for the plaintiff asked for.
Walter Cofer the attorney for Johnson & Johnson produced as a defense witness Richard Jupe, vice president of development and design for Altira Client Services, owners of Philip Morris.
Jupe told the jury he had been involved in attempting with other scientists to reduce the amount of tar and nicotine in Philip Morris cigarettes.
“Has Philip Morris worked hard to remove chemicals from (cigarette) smoke?” Cofer asked.
“Yes we have,” Jupe answered.
“Even today is it known what chemicals cause disease?” Cofer asked.
“No,” Jupe said. “We don’t know the exact chemical.”
“Is there any doubt it (smoking) does cause cancer?”
“There is no doubt,” Jupe said.
Jupe said further study of the compounds in cigarettes will give a better chance to reduce the risk of smoking.
“Does Philip Morris add carcinogens to its smoke?” Cofer asked.
“No,” Jupe answered.
Jupe explained the company had for a number of years sponsored a website on the internet identifying the ingredients in its cigarettes for the public to see.
“Do the ingredients used make cigarettes more addictive?” Cofer asked.
“No,” Jupe said.
Jupe said extensive testing of additives such as glycerol, vanilla, licorice, cocoa, menthol and sucrose have been conducted.
“Did the Center for Disease Control or any government agency ever ask Philip Morris to remove ingredients?” Cofer asked.
“No,” Jupe said.
Jupe estimated that between the years 1955 and 1990 tar and nicotine levels in cigarettes had been reduced about 60 percent.
“If people smoke enough can they still get cancer?” Cofer asked.
“Yes,” Jupe agreed.
“Does Philip Morris offer cigarettes with very low levels of nicotine?”
“Yes,” Jupe said.
In addition to figuring out ways to reduce the harm in cigarettes Cofer told the jury the company had also supported new Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations and also cut back advertising. It included billboards, stadium signs, transit ads, sponsoring of concerts and on merchandise and products seen in movies and television.
Cofer said it would be wrong to punish Philip Morris for the past deeds of officials in some cases going back 70 years, and that the company had changed its ways of doing things.
He asked what good a big punitive award would do.
“What kind of message will this send?” Cofer asked. “Even if you change the way you do business, you’ll still be punished? What’s the incentive to change?”
However, Eric Rosen the attorney for Holliman’s widow Ruby said the company remained unchanged.
“They spent billions to create fake science to feed to the (U.S.) Surgeon General,” he said. “That smoking wasn’t harmful we can filter it out. These were lies.”
Rosen held a pack of cigarettes and said the company was still marketing to teenagers.
“Then what are the little flavor beads on these cigarettes for?” he asked. “They know that.”
Rosen said it took congressional legislation to require tobacco companies to alter behavior, not voluntary action.
“They had to be sued by 50 states,” he said. “This wasn’t mitigation. They never wanted to be regulated they got caught. They avoided it (regulation) for 60 years.”
Rosen indicated filters on cigarettes encouraged deeper smoke inhalation and that ammonia used as an additive to spike nicotine called “freebasing” was part of the deception.
“Is Philip Morris a changed company?” he asked. “They added ammonia to make it easier to inhale. The reduction of nicotine, they opposed it. They knew without it they’d lose their jobs. Nothing was voluntary they were forced to (change).
They need to be punished for what they did,” Rosen told the jury. “The number is up to you. I’m required to ask for a significant punitive damage (award).”
Add Body here