Jury Says RJ Reynolds Has To Pay $23 Billion

[Circuits]

Drawn from the jury pool that gave us Rachel "That's real retarded" Jeantel.

Look children! Everybody point and laugh!

[MarkCO]

While I do not agree with the verdict, I would not be so bold as to try and assert what a 13 year old knew, or did not know, in 1973 about the risks of smoking. What is more interesting, from a legal perspective, is how did the plaintiff prove that she was unaware of the potentially shorter life of a chain smoker. Did she enter into marriage knowing that his smoking had the potential to shorten his life? If yes, she assumed a risk with knowledge!

A product can be "deemed" inherently dangerous or defective if the risks are known, but not conveyed to the end user appropriately. Every culture on the planet uses knives, so the "common man" has been taught by their parents that some care is needed with them. Does that transfer to cigarettes in 1973? While the "warnings" issue has gotten overdone due to attorneys, jury instructions usually account for the common man experience. Only thing that I would want to read in this case is the actual jury instructions.

Lots of legal issues, but there is also no denying that anyone who pays a life insurance premium is incurring some costs of other poor health decisions. This one has the trifecta of the doom of America...Government benefit, Insurance, Attorneys...

[gos]

While I do not agree with the verdict, I would not be so bold as to try and assert what a 13 year old knew, or did not know, in 1973 about the risks of smoking. What is more interesting, from a legal perspective, is how did the plaintiff prove that she was unaware of the potentially shorter life of a chain smoker. Did she enter into marriage knowing that his smoking had the potential to shorten his life? If yes, she assumed a risk with knowledge!

A product can be "deemed" inherently dangerous or defective if the risks are known, but not conveyed to the end user appropriately. Every culture on the planet uses knives, so the "common man" has been taught by their parents that some care is needed with them. Does that transfer to cigarettes in 1973? While the "warnings" issue has gotten overdone due to attorneys, jury instructions usually account for the common man experience. Only thing that I would want to read in this case is the actual jury instructions.

Lots of legal issues, but there is also no denying that anyone who pays a life insurance premium is incurring some costs of other poor health decisions. This one has the trifecta of the doom of America...Government benefit, Insurance, Attorneys...

The first surgeon general's warning announcing that smoking is a cause of cancer in men came out in 1964.

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/Data_stat...tory/index.htm

I, too, am curious about the jury instructions.