Part One of a Two-Part Series
The $10.1 billion judgment entered against Philip Morris in an Illinois state court in 2003 received national attention, as did the reversal of that judgment in December 2005.
Liability Without Harm: Is There a New Source of Catastrophic Liability Lurking Within Your State's Consumer Protection Statute?
The $10.1 billion judgment entered against Philip Morris in an Illinois state court in 2003 received national attention, as did the reversal of that judgment in December 2005. <i>Price v. Philip Morris Inc.</i>, No. 00-L-112 (Ill. Cir. Ct. March 21, 2003), <i>rev'd</i>, No. 96236 (Ill. Sup. Ct. Dec. 15, 2005). Less well known, however, is the theory under which the plaintiffs won their judgment at trial. Unlike the plaintiffs in some other large tobacco verdicts, the plaintiffs in Price did not claim personal injury or wrongful death. Instead, the plaintiffs alleged that Philip Morris deceived them into believing that 'light' cigarettes were safe and caused an entire class of people to pay more for the cigarettes than they should have.
By
James H. Rotondo And Thomas O. FarrishThis premium content is locked for LawJournalNewsletters subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
