L-R: Cassandra Lombard , Randy Rosenblum, and Gary M. Paige. Courtesy photos

PERSONAL INJURY

Randy Rosenblum

Dolan Dobrinsky Rosenblum

Gary Paige and Cassandra Lombard

Gordon & Partners

Tobacco litigation in Florida is bound by a state Supreme Court decision offering pro-plaintiff findings to all smokers suing cigarette makers.

Attorneys with Dolan Dobrinsky Rosenblum in Miami, Gordon & Partners in Davie and the Boston-based Public Health Advocacy Institute took a case in Massachusetts that wasn't covered by the same rules. 

Starting with an empty slate, the plaintiffs firms offered evidence on addiction, the evolution of cigarettes, tobacco industry marketing and the personal history of Pamela Coyne.

She started smoking at 10 and tried to quit using hypnosis, Nicorette gum and nicotine patches and going cold turkey. Coyne died in 2016 after lung cancer spread to her liver, spine and brain. The jury delivered a $17.6 million verdict for her estate.

The May verdict marked the first time a Florida trial team prevailed in Massachusetts litigation against a tobacco company.

Describe a key piece of testimony, evidence, ruling or order in your case and how it influenced the outcome: Key evidence in the case included the fact that Pamela Coyne was influenced by and relied on the misrepresentations by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and its co-conspirators.

Specifically, Coyne's husband testified that she believed the filters on the Winston cigarettes that she smoked made them safer or less harmful than unfiltered cigarettes. Additionally, she ultimately switched to Winston Lights because she believed light cigarettes were less harmful and would help her quit smoking.

This testimony was important because it explained why she continued to smoke cigarettes at a time that R.J. Reynolds claimed she should have known that cigarettes smoking was harmful to her health. It also confirmed she was one of the millions of smokers who believed the misinformation, misstatements and misrepresentations made by R.J. Reynolds and its co-conspirators about filtered and light cigarettes.

From this and other evidence of misconduct by R.J. Reynolds, plaintiffs counsel was able to argue that any fault on her part in continuing to smoke Winston brand cigarettes was far less than the fault on the part of R.J. Reynolds. Plaintiffs counsel successfully argued the jury should find in favor of her estate on one of the conspiracy claims.