Rose v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Dissent
Catterson, J. (dissenting).
Because I believe that consistent with well-established principles of products liability jurisprudence the plaintiffs fulfilled their burden of demonstrating that a safer alternative was not only feasible but, in fact, was manufactured, I must respectfully dissent. Evidence adduced at trial sufficiently established that the safer alternative ultra light was the same as a regular cigarette in all respects save for its nonaddictive levels of nicotine and cancer-causing tar. Thus, I find no legal merit in the defendants’ assertion, which the majority supports, that the…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- BMW of North America, Inc. v. GoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Bouie v. City of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.