R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY; R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO LORILLARD TOBACCO COMPANY; AND PHILIP MORRIS USA INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
JOHN MCCOY, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF GLODINE MCCOY, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the Surgeon General's Reports were inadmissible hearsay and their erroneous admission was not harmless error.
The defendants appealed a final judgment in a wrongful death action. The plaintiff cross-appealed. The appellate court focused on the admission of the…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Public Records Exception To Hearsay cases and more on FLexlaw
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 *848likewise 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.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Bettye Ryan, 231 So. 3d 484 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)…addiction or for some other reason”). Considering the extensive use of the Reports at trial, Plaintiffs cannot meet their burden of showing that the error was harmless. See Pollari, 228 So. 3d at 130-31; see also R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. McCoy, 229 So. 3d 847, 848, 2017 WL 5171351 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 8, 2017). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a pew trial. In light of our disposition, Plaintiffs argue that this Court should remand with instructions that the trial court grant their previously denied…
Authorities Cited
- Special v. W. Boca Med. Ctr., 160 So. 3d 1251 (Fla. 2014)
- Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Pollari, 228 So. 3d 115 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)