Legal Opinion
FANNIE COLLAR v. R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided July 5, 2017No. 4D15-3893PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtGross, J.
We reverse the final judgment for the defense in an Engle progeny case, where the jury answered “No” to the question “Was [Plaintiff] addicted to cigarettes containing nicotine and, if so, was her addiction a legal cause of her lung cancer and/or COPD?” The trial court made two inconsistent evidentiary rulings that favored the defense, which exploited those rulings as a theme of closing argument.
The court ruled that the plaintiffs treating pulmonologist was not qualified as an expert to testify that the plaintiff was addicted to nicotine. 1 On cross-examination, however, over the plaintiffs…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- State v. DiGuilioSupreme Court of Florida · 1986
- Frank Special v. West Boca Medical CenterSupreme Court of Florida · 2014
- Starbuck v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.District Court, M.D. Florida · 2015
3Cited by1 opinion
- R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY v. LESLIE SCHLEFSTEIN, as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF DAWN SCHLEFSTEINDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019