Alaska Jury Deadlocked in Family’s Lawsuit Against Tobacco Company

November 18, 2016

  • November 18, 2016 at 2:24 pm
    mr bob says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 7
    Thumb down 0

    Let me see if I am getting the entire argument in this case. Per the CDC website since 1965 the industry has had to label the product as hazardous to health. That would lead me to believe that since the deceased was 13 years old he was warned of the hazards but made a decision to ignore them just the same. I do feel for the family having lost my own father to lung cancer at the age of 73. My dad had smoked from the time he was 13 up until age 45. Not the lights that this man smoked but rather non filter cigarettes about 2 packs a day.

    I am sorry for the family but having gone through a similar loss can not see how the manufacturer of the product is responsible any more than the manufacturer of the lawn mower who was sued due to some fool picking it up to trim his hedges and cutting his fingers off. Bad things sometimes happen to good people due to the choices that we all make and if you are warned of the hazard and choose to still go forward you have decided the course of your own destiny. In the case of the lawnmower incident was a warning really needed?

    http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/2000/highlights/labels/

  • January 16, 2017 at 6:47 pm
    Ron Lecourt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Nine years have passed since my wife and I got involved with a large
    law firm from Tampa. My wife died 14 month past. I was finally told that her dying put the case in a different light and we would be going to a settlement rather than a court case.my wife died because of her inability to breath. The law firm seemed more interested with cost of the trail, than the actual case.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*