Estate of Schwarz Ex Rel. Schwarz v. Philip Morris Inc., 246 P.3d 479

Petitioner on review sought reconsideration of the court's decision in Schwab Estate v. Philip Morris, Inc., 348 Or. 442, 235 P.3d 668 (2010).
On remand, the court clarified the issue was the correct amount of punitive damages, not liability for punitive damages.
Trial court instructed the jury that punitive damages required clear and convincing evidence of reckless and outrageous indifference to a highly unreasonable risk of harm and a conscious indifference to health, safety, and welfare.
The jury was allowed to consider evidence of harm to others to assess reprehensibility and to determine liability for punitive damages, with a remand for a new trial limited to the amount of punitive damages due to instructional error.
The court reaffirmed that costs on review were awarded to the prevailing party (defendant) and addressed objections to the cost bill, disallowing some pre-decision costs and approving others, including costs tied to the letter of credit.
The effective date of the appellate cost award was set as the effective date of the trial court's judgment on remand; the precise appellate amount would be determined separately.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Remand scope for punitive damages amount?	Schwarz: remand should address amount, not liability questions anew.	Philip Morris: remand should address punitive damages under existing framework.	Remand limited to the amount of punitive damages.
Application of ORAP 13.05(4) to costs on review?	Schwarz: costs on review should abide the remand result.	Philip Morris: ORAP 13.05(4) does not apply here because a final outcome on remand is not yet determined.	ORAP 13.05(4) does not apply; costs on review are determined separately with effective date tied to remand judgment.

Estate of Michelle Schwarz v. Philip Morris Inc., 348 Or. 442 (Or. 2010) (affirmed remand limited to punitive damages amount)