Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. James L. Douglas

Summary

Justice Canady, dissenting, would have quashed the intermediate appellate decision because the prior class-action jury finding that the defendants placed defective and unreasonably dangerous cigarettes on the market did not establish that every cigarette, or the particular cigarettes consumed by Mrs. Douglas, was defective. He also rejected applying claim preclusion because the prior class proceeding did not produce a final judgment on the merits, although its factual findings could support issue preclusion. He would not address an independently asserted negligence theory because the issue was not properly presented or briefed.