R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Ciccone
123 So. 3d 604
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Pamela Ciccone (personal representative of George N. Ciccone’s estate) sued R.J. Reynolds after George — a lifelong smoker — died of lung cancer; she amended post-Engle to allege he developed peripheral vascular disease (PVD) before the Engle cutoff (Nov. 21, 1996).
- Ciccone pleaded strict liability, express and implied warranty, civil conspiracy to fraudulently conceal, fraudulent concealment, gross negligence, and negligence.
- Phase I of trial focused on whether PVD “manifested” before Nov. 21, 1996 (class-membership question). Trial court instructed that manifestation occurs when the decedent experienced symptoms or was diagnosed.
- Experts for Ciccone tied early signs (1991 lumbar MRI showing aortic sclerosis, progressive leg pain and limp in mid-1990s) to PVD; defense experts attributed symptoms to back problems and placed PVD manifestation later (circa 1998).
- Jury found Ciccone an Engle class member, awarded $3,195,222.35 compensatory damages (reduced 70% for decedent’s comparative fault) and $50,000 punitive damages for gross negligence.
- The appellate court affirmed liability and compensatory damages but reversed the punitive-damages award, holding punitive damages not available on gross negligence in Engle-progeny cases.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper definition of "manifested" for Engle class membership | "Manifested" should mean the disease became symptomatic (no pre-1996 knowledge required); class membership judged with hindsight and expert proof | "Manifested" requires plaintiff knowledge of condition and causal link (borrowing creeping-disease accrual/notice rule) | Court held Engle "manifested" means symptomatic manifestation (diagnosis not required); knowledge/notice requirement in statute-of-limitations cases inapplicable to Engle class membership |
| Sufficiency of evidence for class membership / denial of directed verdict | Ciccone presented expert and lay testimony showing symptoms consistent with PVD before Nov. 21, 1996 (1991 MRI, mid-1990s limp/claudication) | Reynolds argued no competent evidence PVD symptoms existed pre-1996; symptoms were from back disease | Court denied directed verdict; reasonable jury could find pre-1996 manifestation based on experts and lay testimony |
| Correctness of jury instruction defining "manifested" as symptoms or diagnosis | Instruction appropriate because Engle looks to when disease caused suffering; symptoms suffice and expert opinion may connect them to smoking | Requested instruction imposed a knowledge-based standard tied to statute-of-limitations cases | Court found trial court’s instruction within discretion and not prejudicial; instruction valid |
| Availability of punitive damages on gross negligence claims in Engle-progeny suits | Ciccone sought punitive damages for gross negligence | Reynolds argued punitive damages limited to claims timely pled in Engle (concealment/conspiracy) and cannot be pursued via Engle progeny on non-intentional torts | Court held punitive damages improper on gross negligence in Engle-progeny case; punitive damages limited to concealment/conspiracy as in original Engle pleadings |
Key Cases Cited
- Engle v. Liggett Group, 945 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 2006) (recertification context and definition of class; key use of “when the disease or condition first manifested itself”)
- Carter v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 778 So.2d 932 (Fla. 2000) (creeping-disease accrual rule: cause of action accrues when cumulative effects manifest with evidence of causal link)
- Celotex Corp. v. Copeland, 471 So.2d 533 (Fla. 1985) (statute-of-limitations/creeping disease context informing Carter)
- Castleman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 97 So.3d 875 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (first district applying notice/knowledge accrual definition to Engle class membership; conflict certified)
- Soffer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 106 So.3d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (holding punitive damages in Engle-progeny suits limited to concealment/conspiracy claims)
- Wald v. Grainger, 64 So.3d 1201 (Fla. 2011) (jury may weigh expert credibility and reject expert testimony)
- Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Douglas, 110 So.3d 419 (Fla. 2013) (procedural questions related to Engle progeny matters)