Today the California Supreme Court answered questions that the Ninth Circuit certified to it in litigation over cigarette addiction. The Court held that, for statute of limitations purposes on an economic loss claim, California law doesn’t presume the plaintiff’s knowledge of smoking’s addictiveness but does require the plaintiff to explain what delayed discovery of his addiction. The Court also concluded that limitations doesn’t start running on a physical injury claim until the injury manifests itself. The case now goes back to the Ninth Circuit. Grisham v. Philip Morris U.S.A., Inc., No. S132772 (Cal. Feb. 15, 2007).
Blawgletter doesn’t smoke cigarettes, but once upon a time — once upon several times — Blawgletter dipped snuff. Very nasty. Very. Nasty. Don’t recommend it. Nosir.