The Case of Michelle Schwarz vs. Philip Morris: When “Low Tar” Promises Led to a $25 Million Verdict
Smoking remains a critical public health issue, with over 16 million Americans grappling with smoking-related diseases. Each year, smoking and secondhand smoke contribute to over 480,000 deaths in the U.S. But what happens when tobacco companies market seemingly “safer” alternatives that turn out to be just as deadly? The case of Schwarz v. Philip Morris USA (2002) highlights the dangers of deceptive marketing and the long fight for justice against Big Tobacco.
The Lure of “Low Tar”
In the mid-20th century, as evidence mounted against the safety of cigarettes, tobacco companies began introducing “low tar” and “light” cigarettes. These products were marketed as a less harmful alternative to regular cigarettes, enticing health-conscious smokers to switch brands rather than quit altogether. However, a 2001 study by the National Cancer Institute revealed that these “low tar” cigarettes were, in fact, worthless in reducing health risks. Smokers often compensated by inhaling more deeply or smoking more cigarettes, negating any potential benefits.
Michelle Schwarz, a nurse who started smoking in 1964, switched to Philip Morris’s Merit “low tar” cigarettes in 1976, believing they were a safer option. She continued to smoke approximately one pack a day, unknowingly increasing her risk by altering her smoking habits. Schwarz died of lung cancer in 1999 at the age of 53.
The Lawsuit: Holding Philip Morris Accountable
Following Michelle Schwarz’s death, her estate filed a lawsuit against Philip Morris USA, alleging negligence, strict product liability, and fraud. The case centered on the claim that Philip Morris deceptively marketed its “low tar” cigarettes as a healthier alternative, leading Schwarz to believe she was reducing her risk while continuing her addiction.
In March 2002, an Oregon jury sided with the plaintiff, awarding $168,000 in compensatory damages and a staggering $150 million in punitive damages. This landmark verdict was one of the first to hold a tobacco company accountable for marketing “low tar” cigarettes as safer, even though they knew they were just as harmful as regular cigarettes. The jury determined that Philip Morris had indeed made false representations about the safety of “low tar” cigarettes, and that Schwarz had reasonably relied on these representations, leading to her death.
Legal Battles and Reduced Damages
Philip Morris appealed the verdict, arguing that the punitive damages were excessive and that the jury had been improperly instructed. The Oregon Court of Appeals agreed that the punitive damages were excessive and ordered a new trial to reconsider the amount.
In 2012, a second jury awarded $25 million in punitive damages. While significantly less than the original $150 million, this award still sent a strong message to the tobacco industry about the consequences of deceptive marketing practices. The United States Supreme Court denied review May 16, 2016 in Schwarz v. Philip Morris, thereby upholding a Portland jury verdict of $25 million in punitive damages for “light cigarette fraud” in the cancer death of Salem resident Michelle Schwarz.
The Significance of the Schwarz Case
Schwarz v. Philip Morris is a significant case in the history of tobacco litigation for several reasons:
- It exposed the deceptive marketing tactics of tobacco companies: The case revealed how Philip Morris and other tobacco companies knowingly misled consumers about the safety of “low tar” cigarettes, prioritizing profits over public health.
- It highlighted the dangers of “low tar” cigarettes: The case helped to raise awareness about the fact that “low tar” cigarettes are not a safer alternative to regular cigarettes and can actually lead to increased health risks due to compensatory smoking behaviors.
- It paved the way for future lawsuits: The Schwarz case, along with other successful tobacco lawsuits, has helped to create a legal precedent for holding tobacco companies accountable for their actions.
- It contributed to policy changes: The case, along with mounting public pressure, contributed to the passage of laws prohibiting the use of terms like “low tar” and “light” in cigarette marketing.
The Ongoing Fight Against Tobacco
While Schwarz v. Philip Morris was a significant victory, the fight against tobacco is far from over. Tobacco use remains the leading preventable cause of disease and death in the United States. The industry continues to evolve, introducing new products like e-cigarettes and vaping devices, which also pose significant health risks.
The Role of Litigation
Litigation continues to play a crucial role in tobacco control. Individual lawsuits, class actions, and actions by state and federal governments are all used to hold tobacco companies accountable, expose their deceptive practices, and recover the costs of treating smoking-related illnesses.
Public Health Efforts
In addition to litigation, public health efforts are essential to reduce tobacco use. These efforts include:
- Education: Raising awareness about the dangers of smoking and the benefits of quitting.
- Prevention: Preventing young people from starting to smoke.
- Cessation: Helping smokers quit through counseling, medication, and other resources.
- Regulation: Implementing policies that reduce tobacco use, such as smoke-free laws, taxes on tobacco products, and restrictions on advertising.
Seeking Legal Consultation
If you or a loved one has suffered harm due to tobacco use, it is important to seek legal advice from an experienced attorney. A lawyer can help you understand your rights and explore your legal options. They can assess the details of your situation, gather evidence, and guide you through the process of filing a claim against the responsible parties.
Disclaimer: This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. You should consult with an attorney to discuss your specific legal situation.