Or so smokers and non-smokers alike believed that "low tars" or "lights" were as less hazardous alternative to full-flavor cigarettes.
Currently, there are three lights cases granted class certification, all in state courts and involving fewer numbers of smokers. Now came a September 2006 court ruling by Judge Jack Weinstein of Federal District Court in Brooklyn, New York that there is "substantial evidence" that the manufacturers knew that light cigarettes were at least as dangerous as the regular variety. And people who smoked ‘lights’ can push their fraud claim as a class-action lawsuit.
This is the first lights case to be certified as a class action in a federal court, one that takes a heavy legal blow to the tobacco industry. After all, this issue is waiting to exhale, that is, after countless puffs by some 45 percent of smokers who chose to go 'lights'. Potentially, substantial numbers of people nationwide could be involved.
The 'lights case' came to palpably float in then class lawsuit air on August this year when Judge Gladys Kessler of Federal District Court for the District of Columbia blurted that "tobacco industry had engaged in a 40-year conspiracy to defraud smokers about the health dangers of tobacco, including deceptions about low-tar and lights cigarettes."
Cigarette-bashing in class-action suit fashion is no new issue. Since the early 1990's tobacco lawsuits have been filed, most of which claimed that smokers suffered personal injury.
In 2004, the Schwab case -- after the lead plaintiff Barbara Schwab was filed against Philip Morris USA, R. J. Reynolds Tobacco, Brown & Williamson, British American Tobacco, Liggett Group, and Lorillard Tobacco. It claimed that, beginning as early as 1971, the manufacturers defrauded consumers when Philip Morris began selling Marlboro Lights, the first light cigarette. Lawyers representing the plaintiffs have said that the class could reach tens of millions of plaintiffs and claim damages of up to $200 billion.
However, in recent months tobacco companies have had field days in the court. In December 2005, the Illinois Supreme Court upheld a decision to toss out a $10 billion judgment against Philip Morris. Last July, the Florida Supreme Court threw out a similar $145 billion judgment in a class-action suit.
Going back to the 'lights case', we know for a fact that the 'Surgeon General' has been consistent. Conversely, a rather heavy statement came from the Altria Group, (formerly Philip Morris Companies Inc.) saying, "the government, not tobacco companies, promoted the idea that lights were a safer alternative cigarette."
It is common knowledge that cigarettes were addictive and dangerous. To what extent did the tobacco companies alerted its consumers? The lack of it is a good reason for the tobacco industry to fear a class-action lawsuit.
Judge Weinstein, who has a history of decisions that favor class actions, rejected the defense's claim that the light case is "enormous in scope and time and in diverse persons affected."
I'm one with the Judge. The light case is not to be treated lightly. After the Federal ruling, we are to exhale some more and follow -- in earnest puffing.