Cole v. The Tobacco Institute

Plaintiffs alleged that defendant tobacco companies had knowingly made false statements as to the health dangers of smoking and the addictive qualities of nicotine through advertising and public statements, and therefore breached an express warranty.  However, the Court found that only one statement made before the Congress in 1994 was admissible, in which major cigarette manufacturer executives testified that they believed nicotine was not addictive. The Court found that the alleged misleading statement made by the Tobacco Institute, Inc. and The Council for Tobacco Research USA, Inc. did not constitute an express warranty, because it was not made by sellers of tobacco.  Moreover, similar statements made by cigarette manufacturers were made 42 years after the plaintiff's addiction to tobacco and they could not have misled the plaintiff.

Cole, et al. v. The Tobacco Institute, Inc., et al., 278 F.3d 417 (5th Cir. 2001).

  • United States
  • Dec 28, 2001
  • United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Parties

Plaintiff

  • Agnes Vondy
  • Barbara Orr
  • Bryan Gibson
  • Carlis Cole
  • Charles Banks
  • Charles Cole
  • Dale Sonnier
  • Daniel Hughes
  • Danny Gibson
  • Darrell Orr, Sr.
  • Frank O'Pry
  • Gabrielle Gibson
  • Gayla Gibson
  • Joseph Wray
  • Jules Williams
  • Kaffie Williams
  • Linda Goodwin
  • Louis Ardooin
  • Luanne Davis
  • Patricia Gibson
  • Patrick Gibson
  • Paul Gibson
  • Paul Wray Ewing
  • Ronald French
  • Ruth Davis
  • Thomas Wray

Defendant

  • B.A.T. INDUSTRIES PLC
  • Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation
  • Liggett Group, Inc.
  • Lorillard Tobacco Company
  • Philip Morris, Inc.
  • R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company
  • The American Tabacco Company
  • The Council for Tobacco Research USA, Inc.
  • The Tobacco Institute, Inc.
  • United States Tobacco Company

Legislation Cited

Related Documents

Type of Litigation

Tobacco Control Topics

Substantive Issues

Type of Tobacco Product

None

"As the district court correctly noted, any statement made before May 5, 1993 is barred by limitations. Thus, the only relevant representation relied upon by the Plaintiffs is a 1994 statement by major cigarette manufacturer executives before the House Subcommittee on Health and the Environment of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, that nicotine is not addictive. The Plaintiffs contend that, despite this statement in 1994, the Defendants have known cigarettes were addictive since the early 1960s....The Plaintiffs’ breach of express warranty claims against the remaining Defendants necessarily fail as well. Defendants’ statements before Congress were made forty-two years after the Plaintiffs became addicted to cigarettes. Thus, these statements cannot have formed the “basis of the bargain” for the Plaintiffs’ initial purchase of cigarettes. "