199 So. 3d 465
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2016Background
- Plaintiff (personal representative of Margot Putney) sued Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, and Liggett for Margot’s death from small‑cell lung carcinoma, alleging negligence, strict liability, fraud by concealment, and conspiracy to commit fraud by concealment; estate and loss‑of‑consortium claims sought, plus punitive damages.
- Jury found for Plaintiff on negligence, strict liability, and conspiracy; found for defendants on individual fraudulent concealment count.
- Jury allocated fault: Philip Morris 15%, R.J. Reynolds 30%, Liggett 20%, Margot 35%; awarded estate medical/funeral damages and $5,000,000 loss‑of‑consortium to each of Margot’s three adult children; punitive damages of $2,500,000 each against Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds (not Liggett).
- Trial court denied defendants’ post‑trial motions for judgment on the conspiracy claim and for remittitur of consortium awards; appellate court previously addressed statute‑of‑repose issue but that portion was quashed by the Florida Supreme Court and this opinion replaces the prior one.
- On remand the district court: affirmed denial of judgment on conspiracy, found consortium awards excessive (remittitur should have been granted), and directed reinstatement of punitive damages against Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of conspiracy verdict when fraudulent concealment verdict failed | Conspiracy is supported by Engle findings showing industry‑wide agreement to conceal and by evidence of pervasive, misleading advertising and manufactured controversy; reliance need not be tied to a single defendant | Conspiracy requires an underlying actionable tort; because jury found no individual fraudulent concealment, conspiracy must fail (Wright/Palm Beach County) | Affirmed denial of judgment for defendants on conspiracy: Engle findings create an independent conspiracy tort (force of numbers) and evidence supported aggregate reliance |
| Reliance proof for conspiracy | Margot reasonably relied on pervasive industry conduct/advertising and the false controversy created by industry; jury questions show reliance findings | Defendants say plaintiff failed to prove Margot relied on statements by any specific co‑conspirator | Held plaintiff’s evidence sufficient; reliance can be established by industry‑wide conduct, not a single statement (citing Martin, Webb) |
| Excessiveness of $5M consortium awards to each adult child | Awards supported by testimony of emotional loss and caregiving during illness; comparable Engle progeny awards exist | Awards excessive compared to precedent; adult children were not cohabitants or dependents — verdict reflects passion/prejudice | Reversed: trial court abused discretion by denying remittitur; $5M awards shock judicial conscience given comparable cases |
| Punitive damages reinstatement after statute‑of‑repose quash | Plaintiff seeks reinstatement of punitive awards | Defendants previously relied on statute‑of‑repose defense; that portion was quashed by Supreme Court | Because appellate court affirms on statute‑of‑repose issue, punitive damages against Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds are to be reinstated on remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Engle v. Liggett Group, 945 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 2006) (Engle findings binding in progeny cases on addiction, concealment, and agreement to conceal)
- Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Douglas, 110 So.3d 419 (Fla. 2013) (identifies Engle findings that have res judicata effect)
- Liappas v. Augoustis, 47 So.2d 582 (Fla. 1950) (recognition of independent conspiracy tort where ‘‘force of numbers’’ creates coercive power)
- Snipes v. West Flagler Kennel Club, Inc., 105 So.2d 164 (Fla. 1958) (discussion of independent conspiracy tort doctrine)
- Wright v. Yurko, 446 So.2d 1162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (principle that actionable conspiracy requires an actionable underlying wrong)
- Palm Beach County Health Care Dist. v. Professional Med. Educ., 13 So.3d 1090 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (conspiracy fails if the goals/counts fail; discussion of Liappas exception)
- R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Martin, 53 So.3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (industry‑wide reliance can support conspiracy/causation in tobacco cases)
- R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Webb, 93 So.3d 331 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (review of compensatory awards in Engle progeny and guidance on excessiveness)
- R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Townsend, 90 So.3d 307 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (example of upheld large consortium award where close spousal relationship was proven)