LegalNewsLine Logo  
Sunday, September 7 2008     Subscribe in NewsGator Online
News | Contact LegalNewsline | About Us | Advertise | RSS
Enter search keyword
 
NEWSLETTER
Receive our FREE weekly newsletter
click here
LNL MOST POPULAR ARTICLES
+ August not a good month for Internet travel company
+ Washington court rules against arbitration clause
+ Brown joins fight over Orange County deputies' pensions
+ Ohio AG partners with FBI on raid on pharmacy
+ Door-to-door sales company settles with Calif. again
LNL HOT TOPICS
+ Asbestos
+ Big Pharma
+ Class Action
+ Dickie Scruggs
+ Gasoline Prices
+ Global Warming
+ Hurricane Katrina
+ Lead Paint
+ Personal Injury
+ Sub-Prime Mortgages
+ Tobacco
+ Tort Reform
U.S. Supreme Court 
 
Former justice: Philip Morris case may define punitive damages law
Edwin Peterson
WASHINGTON (Legal Newsline)- The U.S. Supreme Court's decision Monday to hear for the third time a case involving a $79.5 million punitive damages award to a smoker's widow could set the stage for a judicial showdown, a former Oregon chief justice told Legal Newsline.

The tussle between the nation's high court and the Oregon Supreme Court is over a case involving a Portland woman whose husband died of cancer in 1997, after smoking Marlboros for 42 years.

Former longtime Oregon Supreme Court Chief Justice Edwin Peterson said in a telephone interview that the U.S. justices just may use the Oregon case "as a vehicle to more fully develop the law on punitive damages."

He noted for the last 15 to 20 years the laws surrounding punitive damages have been "in an state of uncertainty."

"The Supreme Court of the United States may also be concerned that the Supreme Court of Oregon is not following the law laid out in its earlier decisions," said Peterson, who teaches pre-trial civil litigation at Willamette University College of Law in Salem, Ore.

Peterson served on Oregon's high court from 1979 through 1993.

In the case against Altria Group Inc.'s Philip Morris USA unit, a Multnomah County jury awarded Mayola Williams $821,485 in actual damages and $79.5 million in punitive damages.

The cigarette maker appealed and the U.S. Supreme Court remanded the case back to the state court on constitutional grounds.

The Oregon justices stuck to their judicial guns and upheld their original decision, ignoring the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling, citing that their ruling followed state law.

Richmond, Va.-based Philip Morris, the world's largest cigarette maker, appealed the case again to the U.S. high court after the Oregon Supreme Court left the entire award intact.

The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the award in 2003 following its pattern of ruling that punitive damages should generally be no more than nine times the size of compensatory damages.

But in its ruling, the Oregon Supreme Court said Philip Morris could not challenge the verdict because it failed to comply with state court procedural rules regarding jury instructions in the case.

Attorneys for Philip Morris USA say the state justices have acted in defiance.

"The Oregon Supreme Court's defiance of this court's directive should not be countenanced," Philip Morris said in the appeal. "The Oregon Supreme Court had no authority either to disobey the clear instructions of this court or to conjure up state-law procedural grounds for the judgment."

Because the case has lingered in the courts, the award, including interest accrued since the judgment, could cost Philip Morris as much as $145 million.

The case is Philip Morris USA v. Williams, 07-1216.

From Legal Newsline: Reach reporter Chris Rizo by e-mail at chrisrizo@legalnewsline.com.

Filed Under: U.S. Supreme Court


COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

No comments have been posted in the last 15 days!

SEND US YOUR COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:


* - Required fields

Subject: *
Message: *
Contact Name: *
Contact URL:
Contact Email: *
This Is CAPTCHA Image
Write the characters in the image above: 

E-mail this article to a friend | Printer friendly format

MORE NEWS HEADLINES:
+ Supreme Court declines to hear Exxon Valdez interest question - 8/12  
+ Massey foe wants U.S. Supreme Court to put W. Va. Justice off cas... - 7/28  
+ Leahy criticizes 'pro-business' Supreme Court - 7/23  
+ Judiciary Committee to probe 'pro-business' Supreme Court rulings - 7/21  
+ Exxon fights interest payments to Exxon Valdez plaintiffs - 7/16  
+ UPDATE: Exxon Valdez plaintiffs seek interest award - 7/12  
+ Age bias ruling could lead to flood of employment lawsuits - 7/12  
+ Starr may defend Arizona's English learner funding - 7/12  
+ AGs celebrate landmark firearms ruling - 6/26  
+ McKenna laments Exxon ruling - 6/25  


IN THE SPOTLIGHT:
Friday, August 29, 2008
CHARLESTON, W.Va. (Legal Newsline) - When House Bill 104 passed during the first Special Session of this year's state Legislature, it did so with little fanfare. Yet it represents to date the single act of oversight the Legislature has enacted over the state Attorney General's office.

Read more...


+ Election spotlight shines on W.Va. AG race - 8/22
+ Call for AG reform growing - 8/15
+ Oxycontin case divides McGraw's fans, foes - 8/8
+ McGraw has taken outside counsel idea to new heights - 8/1
+ Low-profile judge thrust into the spotlight - 7/30
BROWSE BY STATE:
 
BROWSE BY AG:
 
BROWSE BY DATE:
 
LATEST LNL BLOG ENTRIES:
+ AG McCollum on convicts in the mortgage industry
+ Synagro's response to Pa. AG candidate's remarks about sludge
+ Pa. AG candidate: Corbett's sludge stance on side of corporations

NEWS | CONTACT LEGALNEWSLINE | ABOUT US | ADVERTISE | RSS © 2008 LegalNewsLine.com. All Rights Reserved.