Printer Friendly

Some cigarette suppliers bow out of tobacco business.

A handful of tobacco, filter, and flavor suppliers are trying to cut down on their associations with the cigarette industry for fear of being sued, according to recent news reports.

"Anyone supplying the components that go into a cigarette would be well advised to run for cover," said Richard Daynard, head of the antismoking Tobacco Products Liability Project at Northeastern University School of Law in Boston.

The tobacco industry in general has good reason to be scared, Daynard said. In February, a federal judge in New Orleans cleared the way for a massive class-action lawsuit in which millions of nicotine-dependent smokers are suing leading U.S. tobacco companies. Their suppliers face similarly scrutiny.

In the first part of this year, according to the Wall Street Journal:

* Nearly a quarter of shareholders of Kimberly-Clark Corp., maker of Huggies diapers, cigarette papers, and sheets of reconstituted tobacco, voted in favor of or abstained from a proposal to drop all its tobacco-related business. The firm is one of many defendants in a suit brought by West Virginia for recovery of $1 billion in welfare costs for smoking-related illnesses. (West Virginia v. American Tobacco Co., Civ. A. No. 94-1707 (W. Va., Kanawha County Cir. Ct. Sept. 20, 1994).)

* Harley-Davidson, Inc., which licenses its name for use on cigarettes, has entered litigation with Lorillard Tobacco Co. At the heart of Harley-Davidson's claim is its desire to keep its name off cigarettes and cigarette packaging. To do that, it has to break its licensing agreement with Lorillard. (Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Harley-Davison, Inc., No. 95 Civ. 1369 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 27, 1995).)

* Manville Corp. sued to terminate its contract with R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. to supply glass fibers, which are believed to be used in a newly developed smokeless cigarette. (Schuller Int'l, Inc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 95-S-535 (D. Colo. Mar. 6, 1995).)

* Union Camp Corp., International Flavors & Fragrances Inc., and Pfizer Inc. each have cut back or stopped selling flavorings that are mixed with tobacco to make cigarettes. (Suein L. Hwang & Yumiko Ono, Companies Crush Out Ties to Cigarettes, Wall St. J., Apr. 3, 1995, at B1.)

* Alan Blum, the founder of Doctors Ought to Care (DOC) - an antismoking group - said that withdrawal of suppliers' business "offers glimmers of hope in antismoking circles, but it's really just that - glimmers.

"There's no evidence according to my seismograph of any rumblings that companies [withdrawing their business] will actually do any economic harm to the tobacco industry," Blum said. "I'll be happier when I see corporations that disengage from tobacco companies then turn around and actively try to stop them from doing business."
COPYRIGHT 1995 American Association for Justice
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1995, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Brienza, Julie
Publication:Trial
Article Type:Brief Article
Date:Jun 1, 1995
Words:441
Previous Article:State courts tackle DNA admissibility.
Next Article:Preparing tortious interference claims.
Topics:


Related Articles
Warning: sports stars may be hazardous to your health.
FDA asks for help from Congress to regulate cigarettes as drugs.
Class actions claim tobacco industry deceived smokers about nicotine.
The third wave of tobacco products liability cases.
Class actions against tobacco companies win court approval.
Cowboys, camels, and kids: does advertising turn people into smokers?
The nicotine cartel.
Keys to litigating against tobacco companies.
Elements of the cigarette-fire.
Illegal settlement: fighting the cigarette cartel.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2017 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters