Search Results (1451)
Documents on tobacco
Show: results per page
|Oregon Supreme Court Takes Away $100 Million in Punitive Damages Due to Flawed Jury Instruction|
Lori Irish Bauman; Ater Wynne LLP;
July 6, 2010, previously published on June 27, 2010When the US Supreme Court decided Williams v. Philip Morris in 2007, it created a challenge for judges instructing juries on punitive damages. The Due Process Clause prevents a jury from imposing punitive damages to punish a defendant directly for harm it causes to non-parties. But a jury can...
|Smoke-Free Workplace Policies: Some Clarity and Consistency, Please|
Michael J. Soltis; Jackson Lewis LLP;
May 21, 2010, previously published on May 5, 2010The Centers for Disease Control reported recently that tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of death and disease in the United States, causing about 443,000 deaths annually. The report adds that for every person who dies from tobacco use, another 20 have at least one tobacco-related...
|Large UK Fine for Retail Pricing Practices|
Matthew R.E. Hall, Robert Rakison; McGuireWoods LLP;
May 7, 2010, previously published on May 4, 2010On April 16, 2010, the UK Office of Fair Trading (OFT) announced total fines of GBP225 million on two tobacco manufacturers and 10 retailers for retail pricing practices concerning tobacco products in the UK ¿ the largest total fine imposed by the OFT in a case under the UK Competition Act...
|FDA Final Rule Outlaws Certain Brand Names|
Bryan M. Haynes, Nancyellen Keane; Troutman Sanders LLP;
April 16, 2010, previously published on March 23, 2010Your brand that you worked to protect may be in jeopardy. Under the final rule issued by FDA March 19, 2010, manufacturers may not use a brand name of a nontobacco product as the brand name for a cigarette or smokeless tobacco product unless the brand name was being used by both the tobacco...
|PACT Act Passage Could Lead to More Criminal Enforcement|
Bryan M. Haynes, Megan Conway Rahman, Ashley L. Taylor, John S. West; Troutman Sanders LLP;
April 15, 2010, previously published on April 5, 2010Recently, the United States Senate unanimously approved legislation to stop certain controversial sales of tobacco via the internet and mail. The Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking (PACT) Act purports to (i) close loopholes in current trafficking laws, (ii) enhance penalties; and (iii) provide law...
|New Kansas Smoking Ban Directly Affects Employers|
Boyd A. Byers; Foulston Siefkin LLP;
April 7, 2010, previously published on March 24, 2010On March 12, 2010, Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson signed into law a ban on smoking in all public buildings and any indoor place of employment. The smoking ban extends to a ten-foot radius outside building access points, such as doorways, open windows, and air intakes. There are only a few limited...
|No Smoking in the Workplace|
Marcus W. Campbell, Joshua D. Meeuwse; Miller Johnson;
April 7, 2010, previously published on March 26, 2010Michigan’s new law banning smoking in the workplace goes into effect on May 1. It forces employers to take aggressive actions to enforce the ban and penalizes passive employers as well as illicit smokers. It prohibits smoking in any building where employees perform services—and that...
|FDA Moves to Limit Promotion of Tobacco Products, but Is It Legal?|
Elinor A. Hiller, Peter M. Kazon, Marc J. Scheineson, Donald E. Segal, Julie K. Tibbets; Alston & Bird LLP;
March 31, 2010, previously published on March 22, 2010In conjunction with the release of the revised 1996 regulations (modified per Congress’ directions in Section 102 of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act), which take effect on June 22, 2010, on March 18, FDA released a series of documents designed to explain the rule,...
|Hemi Group Decision Will Reshape Cigarette Marketing Laws |
Ashley L. Taylor; Troutman Sanders LLP;
February 8, 2010, previously published on January 29, 2010A recent Supreme Court decision, Hemi Group v. New York City, will result in a dramatic reshaping of the laws governing the marketing of cigarettes. The Hemi Group, an internet seller of cigarettes, sells cigarettes online to residents of New York City. Neither State nor City law required...
|Supreme Court Decides Hemi Group, LLC v. City of New York |
Aaron D. Van Oort, Marie E. Williams; Faegre & Benson LLP;
February 3, 2010, previously published on January 25, 2010On January 25, the Supreme Court decided Hemi Group, LLC v. City of New York, No. 08-969, holding that the City of New York could not state a claim under RICO against an out-of-state cigarette seller based on its failure to comply with the Jenkins Act's reporting requirements. No opinion commanded...