Washington – The Supreme Court on Tuesday weighed a $79.5 million verdict to punish cigarette maker Philip Morris in a closely watched test of whether the justices will put strict limits on big jury awards.
This is the most important case of the term for major corporations, which seek to limit such awards, and the outcome probably depends on President Bush’s two appointees to the Supreme Court.
Bush promised to pick justices in the “mold” of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia.
But on this front, business lawyers are hoping that’s not true.
Scalia and his conservative ally Justice Clarence Thomas have insisted the Constitution does not restrict damage awards from state courts and their juries.
Liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has taken the same view.
If Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel Alito Jr. were to agree with them, they could deal an enormous setback to the business community in its drive to limit big-money verdicts.
That ironic possibility hung over the courtroom argument Tuesday.
A lawyer for the tobacco company said the Oregon jury’s verdict was excessive and unconstitutional because it punished Philip Morris for the possible harm suffered by thousands of Oregonians, not just the smoker who brought the lawsuit.
Andrew Frey, representing the cigarette maker, said the jury saw “itself as the punishment agency to impose statewide punishment for the harms to all Oregon smokers.”
But the lawyer representing the widow said the punishment was due.
In the Oregon case, the jury awarded $821,000 to the widow of Jesse Williams to compensate her for his death.
It then added $79.5 million to punish Philip Morris for its decades-long marketing campaign to deceive Oregon smokers about the dangers of cigarettes.
