Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al. v. Kevin Duignan, etc.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Supreme Court of Florida WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2022 CASE NO.: SC22-330 Lower Tribunal No(s).: 2D20-2714; 522013CA010978XXCICI PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., ET AL. Petitioner(s) vs. KEVIN DUIGNAN, ETC. Respondent(s) Upon review of the response to this Court’s Order to Show Cause dated May 18, 2022, and the reply, the Court has determined that it should exercise jurisdiction in this case. It is ordered that the Petition for Review is granted, the Second District Court of Appeal’s decision in this case is quashed, and this matter is remanded to the district court for reconsideration upon application of our decision in Prentice v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 338 So. 3d 831 (Fla. 2022). No motion for rehearing will be entertained by the Court. MUÑIZ, C.J., and CANADY, POLSTON, COURIEL, and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur. LABARGA, J., concurs in result only with an opinion. FRANCIS, J., did not participate. LABARGA, J., concurring in result only. Because I strongly believe that proof of fraudulent concealment in an Engle-progeny case does not require proof of reliance on a specific statement by an Engle defendant, I dissented to this Court’s CASE NO.: SC22-330 Page Two holding in Prentice v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 338 So. 3d 831 (Fla. 2022). In this case, I recognize, as does the respondent, that this Court’s holding in Prentice is controlling. However, I reaffirm my dissent in Prentice, and I concur in result only to the extent that Prentice requires this result. A True Copy Test: ks Served: RAZVAN AXENTE STEPHANIE E. PARKER JASON T. BURNETTE JAMES W. GUSTAFSON JR. GEOFFREY J. MICHAEL BRIEN V. SQUIRES CHARLES R. A. MORSE DANIEL R. HOFFMAN KENNETH M. GROSE PAUL R. REICHERT JOHN M. WALKER DANIEL F. MOLONY KEVIN D. BOYCE TROY A. FUHRMAN GARY M. PAIGE LAURIE J. BRIGGS THERON HARDEE BASS, III DAVID J. SALES MARK R. SEIDEN HON. KEN BURKE, CLERK CASSANDRA A. CASTELLANO-LOMBARD HON. MARY BETH KUENZEL, CLERK HON. THOMAS MARK RAMSBERGER, JUDGE
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
