Liever Hyman Potter
X
During the COVID-19 emergency we are fully operational and remain available to service all new clients and existing clients, 24/7.

WE FIGHT
TO WIN

The attorneys of Liever Hyman Potter

AUTO ACCIDENT ATTORNEYS, PERSONAL INJURY & MALPRACTICE LAWYERS

Since our founding in 1959, we have won thousands of awards and settlements for victims and their families, including million-$ and multi-million-$ settlements.

During the COVID-19 emergency we are fully operational and remain available to service all new clients and existing clients, 24/7.
E-MAIL    |    TEL    610 370 6682    /    570 794 5017    

Our litigation team obtained a settlement with
a lifetime payout of over $12,750,000 for a middle
aged woman who was diagnosed with a brain
arteriovenous malformation.   read more

A $1,280,000 settlement has been reached in
favor of a retired man seriously injured in an
auto accident at a city intersection.   read more

The insurer for the driver of a truck that swerved to
avoid rear-ending a school bus and collided with
another vehicle has paid 1.2 million for the serious
injuries suffered by the other driver.   read more

A daycare center accident that blinded one eye
of a 22-month old child and that “could have and
should have been prevented,” has been settled...
read more

A woman who was seriously injured when her
vehicle was struck by a drunken driver has won
a settlement of 2.5 million.   read more

Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Workers' Compensation; Products Liability
Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Workers' Compensation; Products Liability
Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Workers' Compensation; Products Liability
Workers' Compensation; Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Products Liability
Workers' Compensation; Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Products Liability
Auto/Truck/Motorcycle Accidents; Personal Injury; Medical Malpractice; Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect; Workers' Compensation; Products Liability
Contact Us
X

Contact Us

    Supreme Court refuses to intervene in $79.5 million smoker award against cigarette maker

    March 18, 2009 by admin

    American Association for Justice
    News Brief

    Wyeth, Philip Morris rulings said to mark Supreme Court’s shift away from business bias. Bloomberg News (4/1, Stohr) reports, “The high court’s order yesterday dismissing Philip Morris USA Inc.’s appeal of a $79.5 million smoker award left companies winless in the three biggest business cases resolved so far in the court’s 2009-10 term. The justices, who declined to rule on the Philip Morris case, said in earlier decisions that consumers can sue over ‘light’ cigarettes and prescription drugs.” While “the recent decisions against companies don’t mark a new trend or an emerging sympathy toward plaintiffs’ lawyers, according to attorneys who appear before the court,” these recent “rulings nonetheless underscore how the court’s pro-business tendencies don’t always translate into litigation victories.” Robin Conrad, executive vice president of the Chamber of Commerce’s litigation unit, said, “It does belie the stories that we’ve read that this court has a bias toward business.”

    The Washington Post (4/1, A6, Barnes) reports, “The Supreme Court dealt a blow to Philip Morris yesterday, ending the cigarette maker’s challenge of an award now worth more than $150 million to the widow of a longtime smoker.” The Supreme Court’s one-sentence decision to not intervene in the case “months after the justices heard oral arguments in the dispute, was a surprising and anticlimactic ending to a case that has bounced back and forth through the judicial system for nearly a decade.” They said, “in the unsigned opinion that they should not have accepted the case for a third time, and in the language of the court, dismissed it as ‘improvidently granted.'”

    The New York Times (4/1, B2, Liptak) reports, “‘The Oregon Supreme Court applied the wrong Constitutional standard,’ Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote for the majority in 2007, and it should now ‘apply the standard we have set forth.'” However, “the Oregon Supreme Court stuck to its original ruling, saying for the first time that it was supported by a principle of state law, one beyond the power of the United States Supreme Court to re-examine.”

    The AP (4/1, Sherman) reports, “Murray Garnick, Altria’s associate general counsel, expressed disappointment with the ruling, but said the decision does not undo earlier high court rulings reining in punitive damages awards. ‘While we had hoped for a different outcome, the Supreme Court has decided not to review a narrow procedural ruling by the state court,’ Garnick said.'”

    The Legal Times (4/1, Mauro) reports, “When such a dismissal comes soon after oral argument, it often means the justices have discovered a defect in the case that makes it an inappropriate vehicle to decide the issue.” However, “when, as here, the dismissal comes nearly four months after argument, it could mean that after several tries, no majority of the justices coalesced around a single position.”

    Bloomberg News (3/31, Stohr) reported the Supreme Court declined “to rule in a case that business groups had hoped would lead to tougher restrictions on punitive damages.” The AP (4/1, Hudetz), Dow Jones Newswires (4/1, Anderson), and CNBC (3/31, Cohn) also cover the story.


    SERVING VICTIMS OF:
    MOTOR VEHICLE INJURY
    CAR ACCIDENTS
    TRUCK ACCIDENTS
    MOTORCYCLE ACCIDENTS
    DRUNK DRIVERS
    SLIP AND FALLS
    WORKERS' COMPENSATION
    OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE
    UNSAFE PRODUCTS/CONDITIONS
    WORK INJURIES
    WRONGFUL DEATH
    INADEQUATE WORKERS COMP.
    MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
    DOCTOR/HOSPITAL ERRORS
    SURGERY ERRORS
    OPERATING ROOM MISTAKES
    PREGNANCY & BIRTH INJURIES
    MISDIAGNOSIS
    FAILURE TO DIAGNOSE
    PRESCRIPTION ERRORS
    FAILURE TO DIAGNOSE CANCER
    NURSING HOME NEGLECT
    NURSING HOME ABUSE
    BED SORES