November 28, 2009

Philip Morris $300 million


On Thursday a Florida jury penalized Philip Morris $300 million in damages to be awarded to a 61-year-old ex-smoker, Cindy Naugle, now wheelchair-bound thanks to the effects of emphysema.

The severe emphysema suffered by the plaintiff is one of many major health risks that come with smoking cigarettes, a highly addictive substance as anyone knows that tried to quit smoking. Tobacco companies like Philip Morris have long histories of deception and corruption in promoting their deadly trade, and I support any verdict like this that holds them accountable in lawsuits by victims of their product.

Philip Morris $300 million
yahoo news

A Florida jury has ordered tobacco giant Philip Morris to pay almost 300 million dollars (200 million euros) in damages to a former smoker ...The jury ordered the company to pay punitive damages of 244 million dollars plus compensatory damages amnounting to 55 million dollars, all to the ex-smoker who suffers from severe emphysema.

Philip Morris $300 million

Posted at November 28, 2009 3:37 AM
Comments

You have got be be joking...I'm all about sympathy and understanding peoples plights...but...it's a sad day when someone can be compensated so highly for their own errors in judgment...in fact their should be no compensation at all...period...end of sad story...I guess we all could sue our parents...our ex spouses...our companies who have used and abused us then just lay us off into oblivion...etc...etc...etc...take ownership for your own decisions in life...accept your fate...stop blaming others...unless...in this case they forced feed you the cigarettes by gunpoint!!!

Posted by: Robert at November 28, 2009 5:08 AM

I do not condone smoking, as a matter of fact I am an anti-smoking zealot however, people choose to smoke and a company should not be penalized for someone who chooses to use their toxic product. The only true victims of smoking are the innocent non smokers who are forced to breath the nastiness or suffer disease from exposure.

Posted by: Rusty at November 28, 2009 10:50 AM

all i can say is that both parties are to be blamed for the consequences of smoking.For Philip Morris alone , i guess its unfair, coz it was aloways indicated twithin their advertising media that smioking is dangerous to health, yet people who are smoking, seems to avoid or disregard the manufacturers ; warning, and i guess, too much of everything is dangerous, no matter what, be a cigarette or not.

Posted by: elmer at November 28, 2009 12:21 PM

they'll win on appeal, but you will never see it covered in the news

Posted by: cam at November 28, 2009 7:01 PM

FREEDOM OF CHOICE WE ALL WANT TI BUT WHEN IT SUITE THE SITUATION BLAME SONEONE ELSE THIS IS STUPID HOW DUMB WERE THOSE PEOPLE ON THE JURY SOMEONE HAS BEEN PROMISED SOMETHING TO GET A VERDICT LIKE THIS SAD SAD DAY

Posted by: JOSE at November 28, 2009 8:10 PM

All those offspring's of a monkeys uncle on the jury
don't have an ounce of brain!
Do you play Russian Roulette with a FULLY loaded gun
Of course not.So why penalize the manufacturer who puts a warning on each package of cigarettes?
This problem stems from socking the big guy and not
reason.I'm for Philip Morris on a long and drawn out appeal ....and am an X SMOKER.

Posted by: Jim Serpico at November 28, 2009 9:20 PM

I quit smoking Thanksgiving weekend 1978. I was 38 years old and was a heavy smoker, 2 to 3 packs of Pall Mall per day. I quit then to have a long weekend to overcome the withdrawal that I knew was coming. When I smell the cigarette smoke from another person, I still desire a smoke but know I must ignore the want. Do I agree with blaming a tobacco company for any persons use of their product? Absolutely not. Read the warning.
Stupid jury.

Posted by: bob stidham at November 28, 2009 9:44 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)