Skip to content

Solved: Was the punitive damage award too high too low or


Was the punitive damage award too high, too low, or just right?

In the mid-1950s, Richard Boeken began smoking Marlboro cigarettes at the age of 10.
Countless advertisements, targeted at boys aged 10 to 18, convinced him and his friends that the “Marlboro man” was powerful, healthy, and manly. Eventually Richard changed to “Marlboro Lite” cigarettes but continued smoking into the 1990s, when he was diagnosed with lung cancer. He filed suit against Philip Morris, the cigarette manufacturer, for fraud and other torts. He died of cancer before the case was concluded.
Evidence at trial demonstrated that by the mid-1950s, scientists uniformly accepted that cigarette smoking caused lung cancer. However, at about the same time, Philip Morris and other tobacco companies began a decades-long campaign to convince the public that there was substantial doubt about any link between smoking and illness. The plaintiffs also demonstrated that tobacco was physically addictive, and that Philip Morris added ingredients such as urea to its cigarettes to increase their addictive power. Boeken testified that in the late 1960s he saw the Surgeon General warnings about the risk of smoking but trusted the cigarette company’s statements that smoking was safe. By the 1970s he tried many times, and many cures, to stop smoking but always failed. He finally quit just before surgery to remove part of his lung but resumed after the operation.
The jury found Philip Morris liable for fraudulently concealing that cigarettes were addictive and carcinogenic. It awarded Boeken $5.5 million in compensatory damages, and also assessed punitive damages—of $3 billion. The trial judge reduced the punitive award to $100 million. Philip Morris appealed.


Leave a Reply