Conn. Mother Sues Juul, Claiming E-Cigarettes Caused Son's Seizures
A Sherman mother has sued Juul on behalf of her teenage son, claiming he experienced seizures because of his continued use of Juul products.
December 19, 2019 at 03:37 PM
4 minute read
Amid similar lawsuits across the nation, a Connecticut mother is suing the makers of Juul e-cigarettes, claiming the products caused her teenage son to experience seizures after he became addicted to nicotine.
San Francisco-based Juul Labs, founded in 2015 as an arm of cigarette manufacturer Altria Group Inc. and its subsidiary, Philip Morris USA Inc., has faced recent allegations that it marketed its products to underage users. The most recent lawsuit in Connecticut was filed by Sherman resident Catherine Faulds on behalf of her son, identified as "G.F."
Faulds claims her son "developed a nicotine addiction and suffered multiple seizures as a result of his use of a Juul device and flavored Juul pods." The lawsuit alleges Juul's fraudulent concealment "was a substantial factor" in G.F.'s "significant exposure to toxic substances, which may cause or contribute to plaintiff's seizures." Faulds also accuses Juul of unfair, unlawful and deceptive trade practices.
The lawsuit, which seeks compensatory and punitive damages of at least $75,000, claims G.F. began using the company's fruit flavors primarily mint and mango in October 2018, when he was 14 years old.
The lawsuit claims the company markets to teens by selling fruit-flavored products and featuring young models in advertisements. In G.F.'s case. the lawsuit alleges he developed a "severe nicotine addiction" and by the time of his initial seizure was vaping every day and consuming a pack of Juul pods per week.
G.F., the lawsuit says, experienced his first seizure while on vacation with his family in Virginia in July 2019. The lawsuit states he "experienced an intense head rush, and he began to seize for approximately five minutes." The teen was hospitalized and required a lumbar puncture, chest X-ray, CT scan of his head and blood tests.
Due to addiction to Juul products, the lawsuit says, G.F. continued to use e-cigarettes and suffered another seizure in a locker room at his high school Oct. 19.
The lawsuit claims G.F. was unaware vaping could cause seizures and that his use has "permanently injured and altered his developing brain."
Lawsuits have been filed concurrently in the San Francisco Unified School District and four nearby school districts, claiming Juul's marketing efforts have resulted in students getting hooked on e-cigarettes. The company is also fighting lawsuits in Florida, Illinois and New York, among other states.
Juul's media relations department did not respond to a request for comment Thursday, and the company had not yet assigned an attorney to handle the Connecticut complaint.
As with other lawsuits against Juul, the Faulds suit claims the company intentionally marketed its products to minors. After Gov. Ned Lamont took note of the potential health issue this summer, Connecticut increased the age for the legal use of e-cigarettes from 18 to 21 in October.
Faulds claims that "even though e-cigarettes are unsafe, Juul heavily promoted its products to young people. Following the wildly successful playbook laid out in historic cigarette industry documents, defendants leveraged social media and utilized other marketing and promotion tactics, long outlawed for cigarette companies, to capture the highly lucrative youth market."
The lawsuit adds: "Juul preyed on youth using media and themes that exploit young persons' vulnerabilities to create and sustain nicotine addiction, all for financial gain, and without giving warnings about the serious risks of addiction, seizures, cardiovascular and brain injuries, and other permanent injuries."
The family is represented by Curt Marshall and Ellen Relkin of Weitz & Luxenberg in New York. "It's a terrible situation," Relkin said. "A 15-year-old boy wound up in a hospital with a frightening seizure and again had a seizure in a school locker room. The FDA has warned about seizures associated with a E-cigarette use."
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Don't Be Afraid to Dumb It Down': Top Fed Magistrate Judge Gives Tips on Explaining Complex Discovery Disputes
State High Court Adopts Modern Standard for Who Keeps $70K Engagement Ring After Breakup
Mass. Judge Declares Mistrial in Talc Trial: 'Court Can't Accommodate This Case'
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How to Support Law Firm Profitability: Train Partners Up
- 2Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 3Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 4Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 5X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250