Guidry v. United States Tobacco Co.
(Consolidated US Dist Ct. W LA) Consolidated with Lonkowski v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Sontag v. United States Tobacco Co., Guidry v. United States Tobacco Co., Hebert v. United States Tobacco Co. Citation: 188 F.3d 619 (14 Sep 1999)This case was brought by Charles and Charlene Guidry against United States Tobacco, Pinkerton Tobacco, Conwood Company, R.J. Reynolds, Philip Morris, Brown & Williamson, Smokeless Tobacco Council, Smokeless Tobacco Research Council, Tobacco Institute, and Council for Tobacco Research.
The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants intentionally created the false impression that the addictive and carcinogenic effects of their tobacco products were much less than they knew them to be. Mr. Guidry's reliance on those representations caused them to suffer from addiction and cancer of the tongue. The defendants also manipulated the level of nicotine in their products to instill a psychological need for them in people like Mr. Guidry. The defendants conspired to conceal or minimize the addictive nature of their products. The plaintiffs claimed fraud and deceit, intentional misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, breach of express or implied warranty, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, strict liability and redhibition.
The case was originally filed in Louisiana state courts, but the defendants removed it to federal district court.
The case was heard in the United States District Court, Western District of Louisiana, Lake Charles Division, before the Honorable James T. Trimble, Jr. The judge initially denied, but on reconsideration granted, the trade association defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The judge held that the allegation of conspiracy between the trade association and manufacturer defendants was merely conclusory. There was no general personal jurisdiction because the trade association defendants' contacts in the state were not substantial, continuous and systematic. The plaintiffs appealed.
The United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (188 F.3d 619) reversed the decision and remanded the case on September 14, 1999. The court held that the plaintiffs made a prima facie case showing the defendants each had sufficient minimum contacts with Louisiana resulting in the plaintiffs' injuries. These contacts took the form of nationally published articles and advertisements. The defendants failed to show that to exercise jurisdiction would be unreasonable or against due process. There was no showing of an unreasonable burden and Louisiana and the Guidrys had a substantial interest in the claims. The claim for conspiracy did not need to be pled with particularity in order to sustain personal jurisdiction.
On remand, the case was consolidated with those brought by Theresa Breux Lonkowski, Tammy Lea Miller and David Shane Lonkowski; Arthur and Beverly Ann Sontag, Dezire Junior and Beverly Ann Besse Hebert.
***Possible that the consolidation happened prior to remand… look into other cases for indication. Check dates