# Widow Of Chain Smoker Gets $23.6bn Payout



## devdev (20/7/14)

http://news.sky.com/story/1304173/widow-of-chain-smoker-gets-23-6bn-payout

A US jury orders the makers of Camel cigarettes to pay the landmark award to the wife of a smoker who died of lung cancer.

The widow of a chain smoker who died of lung cancer has been awarded $23.6bn (£14bn) in compensation from the company who made his cigarettes.
Cynthia Robinson took action against RJ Reynolds Tobacco, makers of Camel and Winston cigarettes, after her husband, Michael Johnson, died in 1996 aged 36.
During the four-week trial, lawyers for Ms Robinson argued that RJ Reynolds was negligent in informing consumers of the dangers of tobacco and thus led to Mr Johnson contracting lung cancer from smoking cigarettes.
They said Mr Johnson had become "addicted" to cigarettes and failed multiple attempts to quit smoking.
The Escambia County, Florida, jury returned its verdict after some 15 hours of deliberations.
RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company in North Carolina
"RJ Reynolds took a calculated risk by manufacturing cigarettes and selling them to consumers without properly informing them of the hazards," Ms Robinson's lawyer Willie Gary said in a statement.
"As a result of their negligence, my client's husband suffered from lung cancer and eventually lost his life.
"We hope that this verdict will send a message to RJ Reynolds and other big tobacco companies that will force them to stop putting the lives of innocent people in jeopardy."
RJ Reynolds plans to appeal the court decision and verdict.
A spokesman for the company said the landmark award was "far beyond the realm of reasonableness and fairness".


----------



## johan (20/7/14)

Note: I am not being insensitive to the late Camel chain smoker or his widow, but if ignorance were still rampant today like yesteryear, the verdict would've been different.

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 2


----------



## Rob Fisher (20/7/14)

This is just stupid! The amount is ridiculous and so is that fact that the chap smoked when he knew full well it was bad for him... I think I will sue the whole liquor industry because my wifes and kids were nearly killed in an accident with a drunken truck driver! Actually maybe I'll sue Toyota because my family was in a Rav4.

This kind of litigation is moronic!

Reactions: Like 1 | Agree 1


----------



## NickT (20/7/14)

I'm the first one to stand up and say that BT needs a wake up. But in this case I hope they win the appeal. The idiot knew full well what the dangers of cigarettes were, and still he went ahead with it. 

If I crash my ST into a wall at 243kph and die, can my partner sue Ford 'cos they didn't explain to me beforehand what can happen if I crash my ST into a wall at exactly 243kph?


----------



## devdev (20/7/14)

That's the funny thing about US law. It really does arrive at some outrageous conclusions, although you can be assured that at the price of having to pay US$23.6 billion as a payout, BT would happily spend up to US$23.59 billion on defending against this claim and having it overturned on appeal - it's going to work out cheaper than paying out at this stage.

Odd thing is that it makes no sense how they arrived at the quantam of the damages. How does the potential loss of one person's income, plus the compensation for emotional pain and suffering to his loved ones amount to 23.6 billion, particularly when he was a direct participant in his demise...?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Andre (20/7/14)

devdev said:


> That's the funny thing about US law. It really does arrive at some outrageous conclusions, although you can be assured that at the price of having to pay US$23.6 billion as a payout, BT would happily spend up to US$23.59 billion on defending against this claim and having it overturned on appeal - it's going to work out cheaper than paying out at this stage.
> 
> Odd thing is that it makes no sense how they arrived at the quantam of the damages. How does the potential loss of one person's income, plus the compensation for emotional pain and suffering to his loved ones amount to 23.6 billion, particularly when he was a direct participant in his demise...?


Penal damages.

Reactions: Like 1 | Thanks 1


----------



## Alex (20/7/14)

I foresee this case continuing in court for ever.


----------



## zaVaper (20/7/14)

Ironically if it wasn't for smoking we wouldn't be vaping.

One would have thought it's common knowledge that smoking kills, however I smoked for years with Danger and
Warning labels on our boxes.
I doubt that it made any difference to my success rate of zero percent chance of quitting.

Smokers have a higher chance of cancer, but know that cancer is within every single one of us, we face the threat of mutated cells everyday!.

Watch this:

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## RoSsIkId (20/7/14)

NickT said:


> I'm the first one to stand up and say that BT needs a wake up. But in this case I hope they win the appeal. The idiot knew full well what the dangers of cigarettes were, and still he went ahead with it.
> 
> If I crash my ST into a wall at 243kph and die, can my partner sue Ford 'cos they didn't explain to me beforehand what can happen if I crash my ST into a wall at exactly 243kph?



Does yours reach 243? My limiter was taken off. I reach 265 on gps and there still bit to go.

I use to smoke camel. Great bunch of guys


----------

