California Court of Appeal

Tobacco litigation verdict was likely prejudicially affected by an erroneous refusal to instruct the jury that it could not base liability on defendants' 1988-1998 conduct. The negligent design of cigarettes was not shown to be a substantial factor contributing to plaintiff's risk of developing lung cancer. Reversed and remanded.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/07/2004
• Published 04/07/2004

Judges

• KLINE, P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
•  Heller Ehrman White & McAuliffe, M. Laurence Popofsky, Curtis M. Caton, David B. Goodwin, Nina A.M. Greeley, Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk & Rabkin, H. Joseph Escher III, Richard Shively; Shook, Hardy & Bacon, Gerald V. Barron, San Francisco, Mordecai D. Boone, Tampa, FL; Womble, Carlyle,  Sandridge & Rice, Jeffrey L. Furr, Christopher A. Kreiner and William E. Latham II, Winston-Salem, NC, for Defendants and Appellants., Wartnick, Chaber, Harowitz & Tigerman, Harry F. Wartnick, Madelyn J. Chaber, Robert M. Brown, San Francisco; Law Offices of Daniel U. Smith, Daniel U. Smith, Los Angeles, and Ted W. Pelletier, for Plaintiff and Respondent.