Legal Opinion
Grisham v. Philip Morris U.S.A., Inc.
California Supreme Court
Decided February 15, 2007No. S132772PublishedCited by 105 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
MORENO, J.
In the context of two lawsuits against tobacco companies by smokers Leslie J. Grisham and Maria Cannata, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals asks us to resolve two questions: (1) For the purpose of the statute of limitations period applicable under California law to a personal injury action alleging injury arising from smoking tobacco, are persons presumed to have been aware by 1988 that smoking causes addiction and other health problems? If California law recognizes such a presumption, under what circumstances is it rebuttable? (2) Under California law, if a plaintiff seeks…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Jolly v. Eli Lilly & Co.California Supreme Court · 1988
- Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1994
- Fox v. Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2005
- Cortez v. Purolator Air Filtration Products Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
- Crowley v. KatlemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by105 opinions
- Brodheim v. CryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- In Re Tobacco II CasesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- Hamilton Materials, Inc. v. Dow Chemical Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Aryeh v. Canon Business Solutions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2013
- Platt Electrical Supply, Inc. v. Eoff Electrical, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
100 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.