Blake v. Lorillard Tobacco Co.

81 So. 3d 637, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 3813, 2012 WL 751504
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 9, 2012
DocketNo. 5D10-1844
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 81 So. 3d 637 (Blake v. Lorillard Tobacco Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Blake v. Lorillard Tobacco Co., 81 So. 3d 637, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 3813, 2012 WL 751504 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the summary judgment in favor of Lorillard Tobacco Company, Philip Morris USA, Inc., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Vector Group, Ltd., Inc., and Liggett Group, LLC (collectively “Appellees”) in this Engle1-progeny case. Appellant argues that: (1) summary judgment was premature; (2) summary judgment was improper because Appellees did not prove the absence of fact issues; and (3) summary judgment was improper as to the civil conspiracy count. We affirm the [638]*638trial court’s summary judgment on all counts, except the civil conspiracy count. As to that count, we adopt the well-reasoned opinion of our sister court in Rey v. Philip Morris, Inc., 75 So.3d 378 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011).2

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED.

GRIFFIN, TORPY and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Boatright
217 So. 3d 166 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
81 So. 3d 637, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 3813, 2012 WL 751504, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blake-v-lorillard-tobacco-co-fladistctapp-2012.