R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, and PHILIP MORRIS USA INC. v. JOHN MCCOY, ETC.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, and PHILIP MORRIS USA INC. v. JOHN MCCOY, ETC.

229 So. 3d 847

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 8, 2017

Docket16-0259

StatusPublished

This text of 229 So. 3d 847 (R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, and PHILIP MORRIS USA INC. v. JOHN MCCOY, ETC.) 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 COMPANY, and PHILIP MORRIS USA INC. v. JOHN MCCOY, ETC., 229 So. 3d 847 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant tobacco companies, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Philip Morris USA Inc. (“the defendants”), appeal a final judgment in favor of John McCoy (“the plaintiff’) in a wrongful death action and raise three issues. The plaintiff cross appeals the same judgment, raising two issues. We reverse.

The defendants allege in their first issue that the Surgeon General’s Reports (“the Reports”) were erroneously admitted into evidence and improperly used to bolster expert opinions. As we recently concluded in Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Pollari, No. 4D16-334, 228 So.3d 115, 2017 WL 3730347 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 30, 2017), the Reports are hearsay that are inadmissible as public records or adoptive admissions and may not be used to bolster the opinions of testifying experts. The admission and use of the Reports in the instant case was likewise erroneous. The extensive reliance on the Reports throughout trial renders it impossible for the plaintiff to meet his burden of showing that the error was harmless. See Special v. W. Boca Med. Ctr., 160 So.3d 1251, 1256 (Fla. 2014) (holding that to prove harmless error, “the beneficiary of the error must prove that there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the verdict”). Because this issue is dispositive, we decline to analyze the remaining issues raised.

We therefore reverse and remand for a new trial. On remand, the plaintiff is free to seek leave from the trial court to add claims for punitive damages on his negligence and strict liability counts..

Reversed and remanded.

Gross, Ciklin and Klingensmith, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendant tobacco companies, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Philip Morris USA Inc. (“the defendants”), appeal a final judgment in favor of John McCoy (“the plaintiff’) in a wrongful death action and raise three issues. The plaintiff cross appeals the same judgment, raising two issues. We reverse.

The defendants allege in their first issue that the Surgeon General’s Reports (“the Reports”) were erroneously admitted into evidence and improperly used to bolster expert opinions. As we recently concluded in Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Pollari, No. 4D16-334, 228 So.3d 115, 2017 WL 3730347 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 30, 2017), the Reports are hearsay that are inadmissible as public records or adoptive admissions and may not be used to bolster the opinions of testifying experts. The admission and use of the Reports in the instant case was likewise erroneous. The extensive reliance on the Reports throughout trial renders it impossible for the plaintiff to meet his burden of showing that the error was harmless. See Special v. W. Boca Med. Ctr., 160 So.3d 1251, 1256 (Fla. 2014) (holding that to prove harmless error, “the beneficiary of the error must prove that there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the verdict”). Because this issue is dispositive, we decline to analyze the remaining issues raised.

We therefore reverse and remand for a new trial. On remand, the plaintiff is free to seek leave from the trial court to add claims for punitive damages on his negligence and strict liability counts..

Reversed and remanded.

Gross, Ciklin and Klingensmith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

229 So. 3d 847, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rj-reynolds-tobacco-company-and-philip-morris-usa-inc-v-john-mccoy-fladistctapp-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack