Gault v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Co.
(Personal Injury US Dist Ct N GA 2001 In Progress) Citation: 627 S.E.2d 549 (13 Mar 2006)This personal injury suit was brought by Willie Gault, individually and as Administrator of the estate of Clara Gault Freeman, and Danny Freeman, against Brown & Williamson.
The plaintiffs claimed that Clara Gault Freeman died as a result of smoking the defendants' cigarettes. Mrs. Freeman died of lung cancer in 2001. The plaintiffs claimed product liability. The plaintiffs sought compensatory and punitive damages.
The case was originally filed in state court, but was removed by the defendants. The case was heard in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The defendant moved for summary judgment on the issue of punitive damages because the case was barred on the basis of res judicata after the Master Settlement Agreement. The judge certified the following question to the Georgia Supreme Court: "Does the doctrine of res judicata bar individual Georgians from seeking punitive damages against [B & W] when the Attorney General of Georgia, suing on behalf of the State of Georgia, released [B & W] from all future punitive damages claims related to the manufacture or use of tobacco products by signing the Master Settlement Agreement?"
The Supreme Court of Georgia (627 S.E.2d 549) answered the question certified to it by the district court in the affirmative on March 13, 2006. It ruled that there was sufficient relationship between the state and its citizens to allow the state to sue on behalf their behalf in regard to public claims. This only extended as far as punitive damages, since they serve the public interest by punishing and deterring the wrongdoer. The matters at issue in the two cases were the same as far as punitive damages were concerned, even though the compensatory damages were awarded for different injuries. The consent judgment issued subsequent to the Master Settlement Agreement was adjudication on the merits for res judicata purposes. With each element satisfied, res judicata precluded the plaintiffs from pursuing their punitive damage claims.