OT (but important): Court Rules Against Tobacco Companies

[Guest guest]

" A federal appeals court on Friday agreed with the major elements of a

2006 landmark ruling that found the nation's top tobacco companies

guilty of racketeering and fraud for deceiving the public about the

dangers of smoking. "

This is fantastic news. The U.S. Court of Appeals ruled against the tobacco

companies in regard to their lies about the dangers of tobacco...so there is

reason to believe the federal courts will eventually rule against the insurance

industry in regard to their efforts to hide the truth about the dangers of toxic

mold.

As we have discussed many times, there is a huge connection between the tobacco

companies and the insurance industry. The insurance industry has used many of

the same experts (to deny the health effects of toxic mold) that were used by

the tobacco companies (to deny the health effects of tobacco). The insurance

industry is using the same strategy that was used by the tobacco companies to

hide the truth.

************************************************

Court rules against tobacco companies

Ruling requires manufacturers to change the way they market cigarettes

The Associated Press

updated 10:05 a.m. PT, Fri., May 22, 2009

WASHINGTON

- A federal appeals court on Friday agreed with the major elements of a

2006 landmark ruling that found the nation's top tobacco companies

guilty of racketeering and fraud for deceiving the public about the

dangers of smoking.

The U.S. Court of

Appeals in Washington upheld requirements that manufacturers change the

way they market cigarettes, which have been on hold pending appeal. The

ruling bans labels such as " low tar, " " light, " " ultra light " or " mild, "

since such cigarettes have been found to be no safer than others

because of how people smoke them.

It also

says the companies must publish " corrective statements " in newspapers

and on their Web sites on the adverse health effects and addictiveness

of smoking and nicotine.

Throughout the

10 years the case has been litigated, tobacco companies have denied

committing fraud in the past and said changes in how cigarettes are

sold now make it impossible for them to act fraudulently in the future.

The companies have argued the ban on labels like " light " would cost

them hundreds of millions of dollars.

The

government filed the civil case under a 1970 racketeering law commonly

as RICO used primarily to prosecute mobsters in cases in which there

has been a group effort to commit fraud.

The

suit was first filed in 1999 during the Clinton administration. The

Bush administration pursued it after receiving early criticism for

openly discussing the case's perceived weaknesses and attempting

unsuccessfully to settle it.

The

nine-month bench trial included live and written testimony from 246

witnesses and almost 14,000 exhibits in evidence. U.S. District Judge

Gladys Kessler heard accusations that the companies established a

" gentleman's agreement " in which they agreed not to compete over whose

products were the least hazardous to smokers. That was to ensure they

didn't have to publicly address the harm caused by smoking, government

lawyers said. Tobacco lawyers denied the contention.

" The

government presented evidence from the 1950s and continuing through the

following decades demonstrating that the defendant manufacturers were

aware — increasingly so as they conducted more research — that smoking

causes disease, including lung cancer, " the appeals court wrote.

" Evidence at trial revealed that at the same time defendants were

disseminating advertisements, publications, and public statements

denying any adverse health effects of smoking and promoting their 'open

question' strategy of sowing doubt, they internally acknowledged as

fact that smoking causes disease and other health hazards. "

The

government had asked Kessler to make the companies pay $10 billion for

a national smoking cessation program, but Kessler said that wasn't

within her legal authority. That issue was not addressed in the appeal

decision.

The defendants in the lawsuit

were: Philip USA Inc. and its parent, Altria Group Inc.; R.J.

Reynolds Tobacco Co.; Brown & on Tobacco Corp.; British

American Tobacco Ltd.; Lorillard Tobacco Co.; Liggett Group Inc.;

Counsel for Tobacco Research-U.S.A.; and the now-defunct Tobacco

Institute.

Liggett was excluded from the

ruling because the judge said the company came forward in the 1990s to

admit smoking causes disease and is addictive and cooperated with

government investigators.

The appeals

court ruled that the Counsel for Tobacco Research-U.S.A. and Tobacco

Institute be dismissed from the suit. Both are trade organizations for

the cigarette manufacturers, but they did not manufacture or sell

tobacco products.

The companies had no immediate response to the appeals court decision.

, a Justice Department spokesman, said lawyers there were

reviewing the decision.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30887739/