Products Liability Law Reporter

A Florida appellate court held that a trial judge’s experience as trial counsel in several tobacco-related cases created a well-founded fear of impartiality.

Here, in an Engle progeny lawsuit, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Philip Morris USA, Inc., petitioned for a writ of prohibition after a trial court denied their motion to disqualify the trial judge. Granting the petition, the appellate court found that a party may move to disqualify a trial judge where the party fears a fair trial or hearing will be denied due to specifically described judicial prejudice or bias. Citing case law, the court said that a legally sufficient motion must allege facts placing a reasonably prudent person in fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial.

The tobacco companies here alleged that the trial judge appeared as counsel of record in 19 cases against them, one of which resulted in a verdict that included $11 million in punitive damages. Additionally, the court said, the judge, as counsel, deposed five tobacco company representatives as part of an Engle lawsuit, raising the possibility that the jury in the case at bar would hear from the judge as both an examining lawyer and a jurist.

Consequently, the court held that the facts, viewed collectively, are legally sufficient to create a well-founded fear that the tobacco defendants would not receive a fair and impartial trial. The court granted the petition, withheld formal issuance of a writ, and remanded with instructions that a new trial judge be assigned to the case.

Citation: R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Cuddihee, 2019 WL 1986206 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. May 6, 2019).