126 So. 3d 1155
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- This is an Engle progeny case where Naugle sued Philip Morris USA for injuries from cigarette addiction; trial conducted in two phases per Brown.
- Phase I found Naugle was an Engle class member and addicted to PM USA cigarettes, causing severe COPD.
- Phase II addressed causation, comparative fault, and damages; jury found PM USA negligent, defective products, concealment, and conspiracy to conceal health effects.
- Jury allocated liability 90% PM USA, 10% Naugle; damages included past medical expenses, future medical, past and future pain and suffering, with punitive damages of $244 million.
- Post-trial remittitur reduced non-economic damages to $9,825,000 and punitive to $25,965,000; total amended judgment was $36,760,500, which PM USA appealed.
- Court affirmed on all issues, applying Engle findings and upholding remittitur and the punitive-to-compensatory ratio as constitutional.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Application of Engle findings to progeny cases due process | Naugle relies on Engle findings to establish duty and causation. | Brown forecloses due process objections to Engle findings in progeny cases. | Affirmed; Engle findings properly applied. |
| Fraudulent concealment and reliance post-repose | Naugle relied on concealment post-1982; concealment proximately caused continued smoking. | Reliance not shown; statute of repose bars post-1982 concealment claims. | Jury findings supported; concealment evidence adequate; reliance proven; record supports verdict. |
| Remittitur vs. new trial in light of passion/prejudice findings | Remittitur inappropriate where jury was influenced; new trial required. | Remittitur proper under §768.74; passion/prejudice findings justify reduction. | Remittitur affirmed; no abuse of discretion; new trial not required. |
| Non-economic damages reasonableness | Award reflects Naugle's severe, progressive COPD and life impact. | Non-economic award excessive; must be further reduced. | As reduced, not excessive; substantial evidence supports the award. |
| Punitive damages ratio constitutionality | High punitive award warranted by wanton conduct and concealment. | 2:1 ratio is excessive; higher restraints exist. | Ratio 2:1 constitutional in Engle progeny context; not excessive. |
Key Cases Cited
- Engle v. Liggett Group, Inc., 945 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 2006) (Engle findings govern progeny liability issues)
- R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Brown, 70 So.3d 707 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (two-phase Engle progeny framework approval)
- Martin v. PM, 53 So.3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (reliance on false controversy; appellate review of punitive damages)
- Townsend, 90 So.3d 307 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (non-economic damages within reasonable range; not shock to conscience)