Posted on 05/12/2004 12:59:38 AM PDT by sarcasm
A series of lawsuits alleging that alcohol companies deliberately market to minors could one day become a national legal landmark - but not unless a "smoking gun" is found to incriminate the companies, legal experts said.
The alcohol marketing suits were filed in Colorado; Washington, D.C.; and North Carolina against Bacardi, Heineken, Mike's Hard Lemonade Co. and a half-dozen other beverage companies, including Golden-based Adolph Coors Co. and its Zima unit.
Legal experts said similarities exist between the alcohol-marketing cases and the national tobacco litigation of the 1990s that culminated with a settlement payment by tobacco companies of more than $246 billion.
But the alcohol lawsuits as yet appear to lack the proof of dishonesty and deceptiveness that characterized accusations against cigarette makers.
"You need a smoking gun," said Sandra Shelson, special assistant attorney general in Mississippi, one of the most aggressive states in pursuing the tobacco litigation. "You need a whistle-blower, an inside person able to produce documents about the intent to mislead the public."
A proposed class-action lawsuit filed in December in Denver District Court alleges that the alcoholic beverage firms have created advertising campaigns intentionally targeting minors.
The suit lists Bacardi as one of the most notable marketers to underage drinkers. It alleges that on a website Bacardi advises visitors how to "avoid any dirty looks from mom as you reach for a Bacardi bottle at 8 a.m." while preparing a "breakfast with a bang" consisting of rum, grapefruit and sugar.
Bacardi and the other defendants have denied the allegations, setting the scene for what could be a lengthy and contentious courtroom debate.
Coors filed a motion last month to move the case to Jefferson County District Court. The motion is pending.
The American Medical Association has estimated that underage drinkers consume about 20 percent of all alcohol sold in the U.S., representing about $22.5 billion in annual sales.
The minimum legal drinking age is 21 years.
Attorneys said they'll seek class-action status, expanding the plaintiff class to any parents with minor children - or whose underage children have purchased alcohol.
Analysts said the litigation in some ways echoes the early legal attacks first brought against tobacco companies in the 1950s. Although initially unsuccessful, the suits multiplied and became more of a threat to the industry. In 1998, the tobacco industry agreed to pay state attorneys general more than $246 billion to settle the claims.
Steven Feder, a Denver-based attorney with Straus & Boies, which filed the alcohol suit in Colorado, said the suit and the tobacco litigation are similar in that both allege exploitation of American youth for profit.
"But one of the differences, in our opinion, is that the damages caused by alcohol far exceed tobacco in terms of money, death and impact to society," Feder said last week.
Part of the success of the tobacco litigation stemmed from documents and information produced through discovery that showed cigarette makers hid the addictive properties and health risks of tobacco.
But that type of damaging disclosure has not yet arisen in the alcohol advertising lawsuits.
"With the tobacco suit, you had an industry that basically stood up and lied," said Shelson of the Mississippi attorney general's office. "You had (tobacco) executives standing in front of Congress and saying it's not addictive. You had 'smoking gun' memos about marketing to kids."
No state attorney general's office has publicly disclosed any investigation of alcohol advertising to minors.
"My view is, show me the evidence," said Dave Horn, senior counsel in the Washington state attorney general's office, which also was aggressive in its pursuit of the tobacco industry. "Certainly we would watch with interest to see if it's something we would pursue."
A key difference in the alcohol and tobacco cases is that alcohol is less addictive to many people, said Dennis Eckhart, senior assistant attorney general in California and head of the office's tobacco litigation and enforcement section.
"Tobacco is a choice, initially, but once you have started, you can become addicted," Eckhart said. "With alcohol, there's an issue of choice, and the proportion of people becoming addicted is smaller."
This is a "cookie cutter." Just put the word tobacco where alcohol goes and it's the same old song and dance.
I get it. All you need to do is pretend that you're the star of 50 First Dates in front of the leftwing activist judge, and you get a slice of the multi-billion dollar pie.
"Well, gosh, no, your Honor - my clients were entirely unaware that alcohol is intoxicating, and can cause serious health problems and death, even though mankind has known these basic facts for thousands of years."
Where do they get these numbers?
Oh - WE TOLD YOU SO!
How the heck does this "expert" attorney know? It is all just another money grab.
From the same place I get my garden fertilizer.
If I did, I would get banned from FR!!!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.