Law Commons^™

Conspiracy Theories: Is There A Place For Civil Conspiracy In Products Liability Litigation?, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

A civil conspiracy is a group of two or more persons acting together to achieve an unlawful objective or to achieve a lawful objective by unlawful or criminal means. During the past two decades, plaintiffs have brought numerous civil conspiracy claims against product manufacturers. The defendants in these cases have included manufacturers or producers of tobacco products, asbestos, pharmaceuticals, lead-based paint, multi-rim truck wheels, and gasoline additives. Surprisingly, less than half of the civil conspiracy claims have made it to trial. This unimpressive success rate suggests that courts are not very receptive to civil conspiracy claims even when there is …

Public Tort Litigation: Public Benefit Or Public Nuisance?, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

One of the latest developments in products liability law is "public tort" litigation. Public tort or government-sponsored lawsuits are actions by federal, state, or local government entities to recover the cost of public services provided to persons who have been injured as the result of a defendant's alleged misconduct. The best known example is the tobacco litigation of the mid-1990s in which more than forty states brought suit against the leading tobacco companies to recoup the cost of providing health care services to indigent smokers. Eventually, the tobacco companies agreed to pay the states more than $200 billion and also …

Toward Justice In Tobacco Policymaking: A Critique Of Hanson And Logue And An Alternative Approach To The Costs Of Cigarettes, Richard C. Ausness, Paul A. Lebel

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Much of tobacco policymaking has been driven by economic and political forces. Professors LeBel and Ausness offer an alternative approach to tobacco policymaking that places justice concerns at the center of the analysis. Their article presents a detailed critique of a significant recent work by Professors Hanson and Logue advocating extensive tobacco industry liability on economic efficiency grounds. Asserting that a “fresh start” is necessary, LeBel and Ausness identify the interests at play in the tobacco policy arena. Instead of an ambiguous "interest balancing" approach, they construct a policy model that grounds those interests in justice considerations, demonstrating how claims …

Paying For The Health Costs Of Smoking: Loss Shifting And Loss Bearers, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Cigarette smoking is known to cause cancer, heart disease, and respiratory problems. These health costs are enormous, amounting to more than $50 billion per year. Although some of these costs are borne by smokers, many of them are externalized to nonsmokers. Recently, a number of states have sued tobacco companies in or- der to recover the costs of treating smoking-related diseases through their Medicaid programs. At the present time, the parties have agreed to a settlement that obligates the tobacco companies to pay billions of dollars to the states over the next twenty-five years. In other words, some of the …

Federal Preemption Of State Products Liability Doctrines, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Federal agencies now regulate the manufacture, design, and labeling of hundreds of consumer products. For example, the Consumer Product Safety Commission promulgates "consumer product safety standards" for a number of consumer products. Likewise, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 authorizes the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration to develop safety standards for automobiles and other motor vehicles. Additionally, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) exercises extensive control over prescription drugs, biologics, medical devices, and over-the-counter drugs. The FDA also regulates food labeling.6 Finally, Congress has established statutory labeling requirements for cigarettes, smokeless tobacco products, and alcoholic beverages. …

The Impact Of The Cipollone Case On Federal Preemption Law, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The United States Supreme Court handed down an opinion in the Cipollone case on June 24, 1992. Justice Stevens, writing for the majority, concluded that the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act preempted all tort claims against cigarette manufacturers based on failure to provide adequate warnings about the health risks of smoking. However, the Court also held that claims based on breach of express warranty, misrepresentation, and conspiracy were not preempted by the Act. Thus, although Cipollone represents a clear victory for tobacco companies, it also leaves the door open for future litigation. The first part of this Article will …

Compensation For Smoking-Related Injuries: An Alternative To Strict Liability In Tort, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The Surgeon General has described cigarette smoking as the "single most important preventable environmental factor contributing to illness, disability and death in the United States." Each year, smoking-related diseases claim more than 350,000 lives. Smoking-related illnesses also impose a huge economic burden on society. Estimates of health care costs range from $12 billion to $22 billion per year, and productivity losses due to illness and death are even greater.

Arguably, cigarette companies and their customers ought to bear the health costs of smoking. At the present time, however, the tobacco industry has largely escaped responsibility for these costs. Instead, smoking-related …

Cigarette Company Liability: Preemption, Public Policy And Alternative Compensation Systems, Richard C. Ausness

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This Article speculates that some courts may have used the preemption doctrine to mask their misgivings about the ability of tort litigation to provide fair compensation to injured consumers without bankrupting the tobacco industry. Consequently, the author suggests that it may be necessary to streamline the litigation process for mass torts or perhaps even to replace it with an alternative compensation system for the purpose of adjudicating smoking-related claims.

With this in mind, Part I briefly examines the health risks of smoking and the nature of the common law duty to warn. It also reviews a number of recent cigarette …