Lawyer control of internal scientific research to protect against products liability lawsuits. The Brown and Williamson documents

P. Hanauer, J. Slade, D. E. Barnes, L. Bero and S. A. Glantz
Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, USA.

OBJECTIVE--To understand how attorneys for the tobacco industry in general, and Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation (B&W) in particular, have responded to the threat of products liability litigation arising from smoking-induced diseases. DATA SOURCES--Documents from B&W, the British American Tobacco Company (BAT), and other tobacco interests provided by an anonymous source, obtained from Congress, or received from the private papers of a former BAT officer. STUDY SELECTION--All available materials, including confidential reports regarding research and internal memoranda exchanged between tobacco industry lawyers. CONCLUSIONS--The documents demonstrate that the tobacco industry in general, and B&W in particular, were very concerned about the threat of products liability lawsuits, and they illustrate some of the steps taken by lawyers at one company to avoid the discovery of documents that might be useful to a plaintiff in such a lawsuit. These steps included efforts to control the language of scientific discourse on issues related to smoking and health, to bring all potentially damaging internal scientific documents under attorney work product and attorney-client privilege to avoid discovery, to remove "deadwood" documents, and to insulate B&W from knowledge of potentially damaging scientific information from other BAT companies.

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Tobacco industry lawyers as "disease vectors"
Guardino and Daynard
Tobacco Control 2007;16:224-228.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Cigarette Controversy
Cummings et al.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16:1070-1076.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Challenging the epidemiologic evidence on passive smoking: tactics of tobacco industry expert witnesses
Francis et al.
Tobacco Control 2006;15:iv68-iv76.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Every document and picture tells a story: using internal corporate document reviews, semiotics, and content analysis to assess tobacco advertising
Anderson et al.
Tobacco Control 2006;15:254-261.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

How the tobacco industry responded to an influential study of the health effects of secondhand smoke
Hong and Bero
BMJ 2002;325:1413-1416.
FULL TEXT  

Exposing Mr Butts' tricks of the trade
Cummings and Pollay
Tobacco Control 2002;11:i1-4.
FULL TEXT  

Tobacco Dependence Curricula in Acute Care Nurse Practitioner Education
Heath et al.
Am J Crit Care 2002;11:27-33.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Science in regulatory policy making: case studies in the development of workplace smoking restrictions
Bero et al.
Tobacco Control 2001;10:329-336.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Cigarette Papers
Daynard
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 1999;24:1400-1403.
 

Prying Open the Door to the Tobacco Industry's Secrets About Nicotine: The Minnesota Tobacco Trial
Hurt and Robertson
JAMA 1998;280:1173-1181.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT