Electronic cigarettes, once widely viewed as a viable and less dangerous alternative to traditional tobacco products, are now increasingly the subject of smokers' litigation.

Among the newest disputes: a federal lawsuit in which Connecticut plaintiff Robert McCulloch accuses Juul Labs Inc. of deceptive marketing and adverse effects.

McCulloch claims he began using Juul's e-cigarette as a high school freshman. He said he has since been treated for chest and lung pain, and been diagnosed with nicotine-induced anxiety.

San Francisco-based Juul Labs was founded in 2017 as an arm of cigarette manufacturer Altria Group Inc., and its subsidiary, Philip Morris USA Inc. It faces mounting litigation, with suits in Florida, Illinois and other parts of the U.S.

McCulloch's complaint is among the first since Connecticut Attorney General William Tong in July announced his office had joined the state Department of Consumer Protection to investigate Juul's alleged claims it could help smokers quit traditional cigarettes.

Juul spokesman Ted Kwong has said the company never intended its e-cigarettes to be a tool for users looking to quit smoking.

McCulloch filed his lawsuit against the company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut. He seeks restitution and disgorgement of profits, the establishment and funding of a medical monitoring program, and actual, compensatory and punitive damages. His eight-count complaint alleges fraud, negligence, strict product liability, unjust enrichment, design defect, fraudulent concealment or omission, negligence involving a defective product, and violation of Connecticut's Unfair Trade Practices Act.

McCulloch's lawsuit alleges he began "Juuling" as a teenager, even though the company has fought back claims that it doesn't market to teens. It claims he became hooked because of the company's marketing efforts involving bold coloring and attractive models on social media and other platforms popular with young people.

"JUUL Labs introduced McCulloch to nicotine," the lawsuit alleges. "Before JUUL, McCulloch had not smoked, vaped, or used any other tobacco or nicotine-containing products."

The complaint claims McCulloch was not aware of the product's addictiveness and nicotine content. It alleges he suffered respiratory problems, bouts of anxiety and nausea, headaches, and loss of appetite as a result. The product also exposed McCulloch to toxic chemicals, including formaldehyde and propylene glycol, according to the pleading.

"He was told to stop vaping, but he cannot," the suit alleges.

Juul's legal troubles include the Connecticut probe, in which Tong questioned its alleged marketing pitch. Tong said the company's product "has never been approved as an effective smoking cessation device."

"In fact, there is mounting evidence to the contrary," Tong said in launching the investigation.

Meanwhile, a South Florida attorney is asking a federal judge to halt the sale of Juul electronic cigarettes.

Jonathan Gdanski, a litigator with the Schlesinger Law Firm in Fort Lauderdale, filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida asking for a permanent injunction, arguing the company never sought approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to sell its electronic nicotine devices, as required by the Tobacco Control Act.

In September, the FDA sent a notification letter to Juul CEO Kevin Burns and Chief Legal Officer Jerry Masoudi demanding the company amend its statements on how its products are advertised.

"We are reviewing the letters and will fully cooperate," a representative for Juul said in an email to Corporate Counsel, an ALM affiliate of the Connecticut Law Tribune.

No one from JUUL's media relations department responded to a request for comment Tuesday.

Representing McCulloch are Marisa Bellair and Steve Errante with New Haven-based Lynch, Traub, Keefe & Errante. Their co-counsel are Jerome Schlichter, Kristine Kraft, and Scott Morgan with St. Louis, Missouri-based Schlichter, Bogard & Denton. None of the attorneys responded to a request for comment.

Judge Warren Eginton is adjudicating.

Related stories: