Castleman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

Decision Date05 October 2012
Docket NumberNo. 1D11–4258.,1D11–4258.
Citation97 So.3d 875
PartiesLewis E. CASTLEMAN and Iris K. Castleman, Appellant, v. R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO CO., Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Willie E. Gary, Tricia P. Hoffler and Paul D. Mark Lucas of Gary, Williams, Lewis, & Watson, P.L., Stuart, and Marjorie Gadarian Graham of Marjorie Gadarian Graham, P.A., Palm Each Gardens, for Appellants.

J.W. Prichard, Jr., Robert B. Parrish and David C. Reeves of Moseley, Prichard, Parrish, Knight & Jones, Jacksonville, Stephanie E. Parker, John F. Yarber and John M. Walker of Atlanta, and Kevin D. Boyce, Cleveland, for Appellee.

CLARK, J.

Lewis and Iris Castleman appeal the final summary judgment against them and in favor of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. The trial court found that R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. was entitled to judgment as a matter of law because the Castlemans did not qualify for membership in the class defined by Engle v. Liggett Group, Inc., 945 So.2d 1246 (Fla.2006),1 and therefore did not qualify for the benefit of an extended limitations period for filing suit. For the reasons explained below, the summary judgment is affirmed.

The material facts are not in dispute. Mr. Castleman began regularly smoking cigarettes at age 19 and smoked for the next 30 years, from 1953 to 1983. He did not have symptoms of heart or lung disease when he quit smoking in 1983. In the early 1990's Mr. Castleman began to experience shortness of breath and bouts of coughing. In 1993, he also began suffering from chest pain. Neither Mr. Castleman nor any of his medical care providers attributed his health issues to his prior history of smoking until 1998, when Mr. Castleman underwent heart bypass surgery. In 1998, his medical care providers advised him for the first time that the symptoms he was experiencing and his heart and lung conditions were likely smoking-related.

The limitations period for products liability, fraud, and negligence actions is four years. § 95.11(3), Fla. Stat. However, the Florida Supreme Court extended the limitations cut-off date in Engle v. Liggett Group, Inc., for certain individual litigants. While the Florida Supreme Court decertified the class for subsequent proceedings in Engle v. Liggett Group, it ruled that individuals fitting the class description could pursue separate actions against tobacco companies within the time limits set out in the opinion.2 The court specified that individual litigants eligible for class benefits were those “Florida residents fitting the class description as of the trial court's order dated November 21, 1996. Engle, 945 So.2d at 1277 (emphasis added). In addition, the qualifying individuals were required to file their lawsuits “within one year of the mandate in this case even if the class member's disease or condition “manifested” itself more than four years prior to the filing of the suit. Engle, 945 So.2d at 1276. The mandate was issued on January 11, 2007. Engle v. Liggett Group, Inc., No. SC03–1856. Thus, individuals fitting the class description by the cut-off date could file suit until January 11, 2008.

The Castlemans filed this action on January 10, 2008. Accordingly, if they fit the Engle class description as of November 21, 1996, their lawsuit was timely. If not, the suit was time-barred by section 95.11(3), Florida Statutes. Rearick v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 68 So.3d 944 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (summary judgment for defendant affirmed where plaintiff filed suit in 2008; plaintiff's relative died 15 years prior to 2008; because plaintiff did not qualify for Engle class, lawsuit was time-barred).

Qualification for Engle class benefits does not require a formal diagnosis that a disease or condition was tobacco-related on or before November 21, 1996. As stated by the Court, [t]he critical event is not when an illness was actually diagnosed by a physician, but when the disease or condition first manifested itself.” Engle, 945 So.2d at 1276;see also Frazier v. Philip Morris USA Inc., 89 So.3d 937 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). The dispositive issue here is thus whether Mr. Castleman's smoking-related diseases or conditions “manifested” themselves on or before November 21, 1996, thus qualifying the Castlemans for Engle class membership.

In Frazier v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., the Third District Court of Appeal considered the meaning of “manifestation” of a smoking-related disease or condition for purposes of the limitations period for individual lawsuits. The court referred to the Engle rule that the critical date was not the date of diagnosis, but the date “the disease or condition manifested itself,” and noted that [t]he context involved a class membership cutoff date rather than a limitations date, but Florida's decisional law regarding so-called ‘creeping diseases' such as asbestosis or silicosis is consistent with that formulation.” Frazier, 89 So.3d at 944. Applying the definition of “manifestation” set out in Carter v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 778 So.2d 932 (Fla.2000), the Frazier court held that symptoms such as shortness of breath and persistent coughing did not constitute a sufficient legal basis for initiating a lawsuit against a tobacco company,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Ciccone
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 12 Noviembre 2013
    ...added). To give meaning to the Supreme Court's use of the term “manifested itself” in Engle, R.J. Reynolds relies upon Castleman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., a case which holds that a condition “manifests” itself as a tobacco-related illness for the purpose of Engle class membership only w......
  • R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Ciccone
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 14 Agosto 2013
    ...added). To give meaning to the Supreme Court's use of the term "manifested itself" in Engle, R.J. Reynolds relies upon Castleman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., a case which holds that a condition "manifests" itself as a tobacco-related illness for the purpose of Engle class membership only w......
  • Berger v. Philip Morris USA Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • 24 Septiembre 2014
    ...WL 2885424 (Fla. June 13, 2014).PMUSA asserted that the Florida Supreme Court will endorse the decision in Castleman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 97 So.3d 875 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).For the following reasons, I agreed with Mrs. Berger's contention that it is more likely that the Court will af......
  • R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Ciccone
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 24 Marzo 2016
    ...for class membership.” Id. at 614.The First District Court of Appeal reached a contrary conclusion in Castleman v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 97 So.3d 875 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). Relying on inapplicable precedent from the statute of limitations context, the First District defined “manifestatio......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT