首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
A federal judge on Monday certified a $200 billion class action lawsuit against the tobacco industry for its marketing of light
A federal judge on Monday certified a $200 billion class action lawsuit against the tobacco industry for its marketing of light
admin
2011-01-11
57
问题
A federal judge on Monday certified a $200 billion class action lawsuit against the tobacco industry for its marketing of light cigarettes.
Eastern District of New York Judge Jack B. Weinstein’s 540-page opinion in Schwab v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 04-CIV-1945—which included an additional 965 pages of appendices for a total of 1,505 pages—gave tens of millions of smokers an avenue to recover damages from the nation’s largest tobacco companies, including Philip Morris USA Inc., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., Lorillard Tobacco Co., and Liggett Group, Inc.
The class will include anyone who purchased light cigarettes from the time tobacco companies began selling them in the 1970s. The judge said he even would consider broadening the class, to encompass smokers of all "low tar" brands, not just light cigarettes. The judge suggested that an expansion of the class could assist the parties in negotiating a global settlement. He set a trial date for January 22, 2007. The plaintiffs intend to seek treble damages.
einstein has expressed skepticism about the plaintiffs’ theory of damages, which alleges that light smokers were defrauded of billions because they believed they were buying a product of greater value because of its health advantages. The judge also questioned the size of the class, as well as the claim that as many as 90 percent of light cigarette smokers chose the cigarettes because they were less harmful.
In his ruling Monday, the judge stressed that while the suit was far from perfect, the evidence was sufficient. He said the jury system—which he described as the "ultimate focus group of the law"—was well equipped to sort out the particulars in accordance with Amendment Ⅶ of the U.S. Constitution.
Weinstein declined to grant an interlocutory appeal to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Theodore M. Grossman of Jones Day in Cleveland, which represents R.J. Reynolds, said the defendants would seek a stay and appeal the class certification under Rule 23(f)of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
As mentioned in Paragraph 3, tobacco companies in the U.S. began marketing ______ in the 1970s.
选项
A、high-class cigarettes
B、low-class cigarettes
C、light cigarettes
D、low tar brands
答案
C
解析
细节题型见第三段第一句:The class will include anyone who purchased light cigarettes from the time tobacco companies began selling them in the 1970s.由此可见烟草公司在二十世纪七十年代开始将淡烟投入市场;因此C为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/dUgO777K
本试题收录于:
CATTI二级笔译综合能力题库翻译专业资格(CATTI)分类
0
CATTI二级笔译综合能力
翻译专业资格(CATTI)
相关试题推荐
Abouttwo-thirdsoftheworld’spopulationisexpectedtoliveincitiesbytheyear2020and,accordingtotheUnitedNations,
Abouttwo-thirdsoftheworld’spopulationisexpectedtoliveincitiesbytheyear2020and,accordingtotheUnitedNations,
Despitetheirgoodservices,mostinnsarelesscostlythanhotelsof______standards.
Thosewhofightagainstalcoholsalessaytheextrataxcomesatacost.LeeMiller,aleaderofAngelinaCitizensforaBetter
Thosewhofightagainstalcoholsalessaytheextrataxcomesatacost.LeeMiller,aleaderofAngelinaCitizensforaBetter
AsurveyofcorporateAmericabyBusinessWeekshowedwhatthemagazinecalled"ayawningdividebetweenfamily-friendlinessin
ManyEuropeansconsiderAmericansoverweight,wasteful,andtheydon’tunderstandinternationalpolitics.
InaletterdatedSaturday,agroupofinternationalstudentsatDukepetitionedtheuniversitytoinvestigatewhathappenedin
Thefindingsofthisstudyunderscoretheimperativeformentalhealthservicestobeattentivetoconsumers’perceivedneeds.
随机试题
支气管哮喘病人不会出现下列哪种情况
国产液压防喷器型号中类型代号"2FZ"表示()。
Mymotherboughtthatcoat_____alowprice.
漏出性出血发生在
某山区大多数人的牙齿都呈褐色或浅黄色,孩子居多,更有甚者牙齿磨损且呈黑色,有的关节变形。发生以上症状的原因是()
口服有机磷杀虫药后,中毒症状出现的时间是()
采用水泥土搅拦桩加固地基,桩径取d=0.5m,等边三角形布置,复合地基置换率m=0.18,桩间土承载力特征值fak=70kPa,桩间土承载力折减系数β=0.50,现要求复合地基承载力特征值达到160kPa,问水泥土抗压强度平均值fcu(90天龄期的折减系
日本A商在我沿海某地采取定牌来料加工某电器产品。成品返销日本市场后,日本另一B电器生产厂商控告A冒用其牌子。事后查明B厂商上述牌子在日本和我国均已办妥商标注册。在上述情况下,A商应承担什么责任?我国厂家有何教训?
根据诉讼时效法律制度的规定,当事人对下列债权请求权提出诉讼时效抗辩,人民法院不予支持的有()。
A、Themanacceptsherinvitation.B、Themandoesn’tfeelworriedaboutthetest.C、Thewomangiveshimsomeadvice.D、Thewoman
最新回复
(
0
)