Comments on: Jury Awards $300M In Ex-Smoker Suit

By: Liberals Demise

Liberals Demise — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:57:31 +0000

After the lawyers (grrrrrrrr) get their cut she will have enough left for recaps on the wheel chair and a weeks worth of bottled O2.

Hey Cindy?
Does cigarette smoking make you looks any older now?

Cry baby!!

By: mjwooten

mjwooten — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:38:32 +0000

Geez whiz! I have smoked for 37 years. So far, miraculously, I have managed to avoid any complications. However, I alone am responsible if anything happens to me. I use the product, I pay the price. There is no one to blame but myself.

You know, this all ties back in with a sad trend. The trend for people to “expect” something for nothing…entitlements…the “have nots” expecting something from the “have’s” because they are too lazy to become a “have”, not taking responsibility for one’s own actions, expecting some kind of handout or leg up simply because of their race, color, creed or religion.

Like the fellow earlier, if you eat too many big mac’s, whose fault is it? YOURS! If you smoke yourself into oblivion…whose fault is it? YOURS! If you engage in risky sexual activity and contract HIV or some other disease…yes…you guessed it…it is YOUR fault! Unfortunately this sad trend involves taxpayer dollars going to subsidize the irresponsible.

Pathetic.

By: MinnesotaRush

MinnesotaRush — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 03:32:29 +0000

And, wardmama …. how many more smokers will be calling her lawyer over the next several days, weeks, and months to get their case started?

ANOTHER Pandora’s Box get’s opened.

By: wardmama4

wardmama4 — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:02:33 +0000

Chuckk – you are so right on the comment.

But I have to ask some questions -

1) She started smoking – 1968 – already into the “Warning Labels” (1966) on the labels – and this is not something necessary – solely voluntary thing to do. Thus the majority of the responsibility should be on her shoulders – sorry I now about the addictive nature (ex-smoker myself) but I am talking about the starting here.

2) 25 years – Did she ever try to quit, until the patch – and oh btw – when was her emphysema diagnosed (and if it was before 1993 – should she be awarded a plug nickel for continuing to smoke after the diagnosis)?

3) Are these people nuts – that is $12,000,000. per year of smoking – I’m sorry but I do not know a single person whose life is worth $12,000, 000. a year – for something they started – they set out to do and continued knowing it could cause them illness and/or death.

And this is the reason we need TORT REFORM in all instances.

She did this to herself – And all of America is going to pay for it – when the Insurance Companies add this (and every other stupid lawsuit award) into each and everyone of our rates.

How damn stupid people are – but then John Edwards made his millions on the slick scamming of stupid people like this.

By: Chuckk

Chuckk — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:24:01 +0000

Sadly, I have read this story 1000 time over. I suspect the sleazy lawyers, ala John Edwards, will end up with most of any money that eventually changes hands.

By: beautyofreason

beautyofreason — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:39:41 +0000

Well, I can’t exactly sue McDonalds if I develop heart disease from eating processed foods that are high in sugar and saturated fat.

Nicotine is addictive, and smoking is deadly. We all know it.

I’m sorry for how her life turned out.
But she is still responsible for using the product.

By: mr_bill

mr_bill — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:07:35 +0000

I think we should give him about $10 million….worth of lead…..dropped on him all at once…splat!

By: proreason

proreason — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 16:49:33 +0000

How much will Hasan get for the abuse that society has heaped on him?

By: mr_bill

mr_bill — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:00:39 +0000

The $300 million figure is misleading. A civil jury in a tort case, after having found a tort, will be charged with determining the true compensatory damages, and in some cases, exemplary (punitive) damages. These recommendations are then returned to the court. The plaintiff must then choose whether to accept the compensatory or the exemplary damages (whichever is easier to uphold on appeal, almost always compensatory), but NOT both. The award is then reduced by the amount of comparable negligence. If the plaintiff is 40% at fault, then he/she may only recover 60% of the damages awarded by the jury (remember that in civil court, one need only be 51% at fault to have judgment entered against them). Yes, I am a smoker.

By: Jason Gillman

Jason Gillman — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:25:33 +0000

Having smoked for 18 years before quitting 15 years ago, I can can attest to the difficulty of nicotine addiction. However, addiction can hardly rule out the ultimate responsibility which lay at the feet of the smoker.

Pathetic..