Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Naugle
103 So. 3d 944
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- Naugle sued Philip Morris USA, Inc. for injuries from addiction to PM USA cigarettes in an Engle progeny case.
- The trial proceeded in two phases: Phase I determined Naugle was an Engle class member, addicted to nicotine causing COPD; Phase II addressed causation, fault, and damages.
- Phase II jury found PM USA 90% at fault; damages awarded included past and future medical and pain-and-suffering sums; punitive damages were $244 million, supported by clear-and-convincing evidence.
- Trial court remitted non-economic and punitive damages, applying comparative fault, resulting in $12,982,500 compensatory and $25,965,000 punitive after remittitur; final judgment was $36,760,500.
- PM USA appealed, and the appellate court granted rehearing, reversed in part, and remanded for a new trial on damages due to error in remittitur and the jury’s passion-driven damages; some issues were foreclosed by Brown.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engle findings and legal causation application | Naugle relied on Engle findings and post-1982 concealment to prove causation. | Engle findings should not bar claims or misstate causation; trial court erred in instructing legal causation for Phase II. | Affirm liability findings; remand for new damages trial on compensatory and punitive damages. |
| Fraudulent concealment reliance and repose | Reliance proven; concealment after 1982 continued; repose does not bar claims. | Reliance insufficient and repose bars post-1982 concealment claims. | Jury findings on reliance and post-1982 concealment supported; no reversal on this point. |
| Remittitur versus new trial on damages | Remittitur cures errors and preserves judgment. | Remittitur infected by passion/prejudice; new trial required. | Remittitur insufficient; abuse of discretion; remand for a new trial on damages. |
| Waiver of statutory repose challenge on rehearing | Argument not raised in initial brief; waived on rehearing. | Waived; issue not considered. |
Key Cases Cited
- Engle v. Liggett Group, Inc., 945 So.2d 1246 (Fla.2006) (Engle findings establish concealment/addiction theory in progeny cases)
- R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Brown, 70 So.3d 707 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (approved two-phase trial and legal causation framework)
- Martin v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 53 So.3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (concealment created doubt about health hazards; reliance supported)
- Lassitter v. International Union of Operating Engineers, 349 So.2d 622 (Fla.1977) (remittitur/ improper influences principle highlighted)
- Waste Management, Inc. v. Mora, 940 So.2d 1105 (Fla.2006) (remittitur and post-trial remedies; adverse party consideration)
- Olivas v. Peterson, 969 So.2d 1138 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (remittitur considerations in4th DCA)
- NITV, L.L.C. v. Baker, 61 So.3d 1249 (Fla.4th DCA 2011) (directed verdict standard de novo review)
- Humana, Inc. v. Castillo, 728 So.2d 261 (Fla.2d DCA 1999) (fraudulent concealment reliance principles)