Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
Tobacco Control 2004;13(Supplement 1 ):i61-i66; doi:10.1136/tc.2003.004457
Copyright © 2004 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
Tobacco Control 2004;13:i61
© 2004 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd

RESEARCH PAPER

Lawsuits and secondhand smoke

E L Sweda, Jr

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Edward L Sweda
Senior Attorney, Tobacco Control Resource Center, Northeastern University School of Law, Boston, Massachusetts; ed{at}tplp.org

Objective: This paper describes secondhand smoke (SHS) litigation over the past quarter century where non-smoking litigants have prevailed and attempts to decipher trends in the law that may impact the course of future cases.

Methods: Since the early 1980s, the author has sought and examined legal cases in which SHS exposure is an important factor. Law library searches using the official reporter system (for example, Shimp v. New Jersey Bell Telephone Co., 368 A.2d 408) have more recently been combined with computerised online searches using LexisNexis and Westlaw. The author has learned of other cases through personal correspondence and from articles in newspapers. Over 420 cases involving exposure to SHS were identified. Each case was reviewed and summarised.

Results: Since 1976, the year of the first reported SHS lawsuit, this type of litigation has increased both in number and in scope with increasing success. While it is common for initial cases to lose in a new area where the law eventually evolves, litigants and their lawyers who later bring similar cases can learn from those previous, unsuccessful cases. It is now apparent that the judicial branch has begun to recognise the need to protect the public—especially some of the most vulnerable members of our society—from the serious threat to their health that is exposure to SHS.

Conclusions: Successful cases brought on behalf of individuals exposed to SHS produce an additional benefit for the public health by both paving the way for other non-smoking litigants to succeed in their cases and persuading business owners and others voluntarily to make their facilities 100% smoke-free.

Abbreviations: ADA, Americans With Disabilities Act; ETS, environmental tobacco smoke; FAMRI, Flight Attendant Medical Research Institute; PWDCRA, Persons with Disabilities Civil Rights Act; SHS, secondhand smoke


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Invernizzi, G., Boffi, R., Ruprecht, A., Lazzaro, A., Fabbri, L. M. (2008). Passive smoking and asthma death. Eur Respir J 32: 1117-1117 [Full Text]  
  • Thomson, G., Wilson, N., Howden-Chapman, P. (2006). Population level policy options for increasing the prevalence of smokefree homes.. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 60: 298-304 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Flores, M L, Barnoya, J, Mejia, R, Alderete, E, Perez-Stable, E J (2006). Litigation in Argentina: challenging the tobacco industry.. Tobacco Control 15: 90-96 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Richmond, J B, Burns, D M, Cummings, K M (2004). Public health and the power of individual action. Tobacco Control 13: i1-2 [Full Text]  

eLetters:

Read all eLetters

Update on a Secondhand-Smoke Lawsuit
Edward L Sweda
Tobacco Control Online, 26 Feb 2004 [Full text]

This Article

Services
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.