The Florida Supreme Court heard oral arguments this month in the potentially far-reaching case of John Price, a smoker who sued the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., arguing that his chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was the result of an addiction to cigarettes.
Price’s estate won a $6.1 million damages award against the company, but an appeals court ordered a new trial because of what it said were inadequate jury instructions stemming from a landmark 2006 state Supreme Court ruling, Engle v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The 2006 ruling spawned what are now called “Engle progeny” cases, which could potentially number 1,600, according to attorneys who presented oral arguments before the high court on June 2.
The 2006 decision put in place ground rules for deciding future liability against tobacco companies, but the high court could potentially revisit those findings and rethink how the remaining tobacco cases will be adjudicated.
Celene Humphries represents the Price estate.
“R.J. Reynolds is asking the court to step away from binding precedent,” the attorney for the Price estate, Celene Humphries, told the Florida Record.
Humphries contends that R.J. Reynolds concealed information about the dangers of smoking, contributing to Price’s decision to continue smoking and prompting the wrongful death litigation. The 2006 Engle case decertified a large class-action tobacco lawsuit but allowed individual cases like Price’s to be filed. In addition, plaintiffs could rely on the liability findings in Engle.
It could take the high court four months or more to make a decision in the Price case, according to Humphries. The tobacco company argues that the underlying liability findings in the Engle case should be overturned so that the findings in Engle don’t bind future juries.
“The current regime is entirely lawless,” R.J. Reynolds’ attorney, Michael Carvin, told the court, adding that the Engle results deprive the company of being able to fully defend itself against fraudulent concealment charges.