R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Williams

District Court of Appeal of Florida

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Williams

183 So. 3d 408, 2014 WL 4344369, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 13678

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 3, 2014

DocketNo. 3D13-2099

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 183 So. 3d 408 (R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Williams) 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

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Williams, 183 So. 3d 408, 2014 WL 4344369, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 13678 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

WELLS, Judge.

In this Engle¹ progeny case, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company appeals from a jury verdict entered in favor of the plaintiff below, Virginia Williams, individually and as personal representative for the estate of Milton T. Williams. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the verdict and the judgment entered thereon.

We find no merit in Ms. Williams’ cross-appeal of the trial court’s denial of her motion to assert a claim for punitive damages on her intentional tort claims, and like our sister court in Soffer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 106 So.3d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012), review granted, 139 So.3d 887 (Fla.2014), we find no basis to support a claim for such damages on her remaining non-intentional tort (negligence and strict liability) claims.

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

WELLS, Judge.

In this Engle¹ progeny case, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company appeals from a jury verdict entered in favor of the plaintiff below, Virginia Williams, individually and as personal representative for the estate of Milton T. Williams. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the verdict and the judgment entered thereon.

We find no merit in Ms. Williams’ cross-appeal of the trial court’s denial of her motion to assert a claim for punitive damages on her intentional tort claims, and like our sister court in Soffer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 106 So.3d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012), review granted, 139 So.3d 887 (Fla.2014), we find no basis to support a claim for such damages on her remaining non-intentional tort (negligence and strict liability) claims.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

183 So. 3d 408, 2014 WL 4344369, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 13678, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rj-reynolds-tobacco-co-v-williams-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack