Taylor Anderson LLP attorneys Paul A. Buckley, Zachary D. Rutman, Mallory E. Lorber, and Jens Omdal, from the firm’s San Diego, Palo Alto, and Denver offices, secured summary judgment in favor of the Estate of a former executive director of a Washington State group home in a negligence action pending in Pierce County Superior Court in Washington state.
The plaintiffs were former residents of a boys’ group home in Washington State from the late 1970s through the early 1990s. These residents asserted claims against the group home, its employees, and several Kiwanis organizations, alleging that they were provided cigarettes and other tobacco products as rewards for certain behavior while residing at the facility. Plaintiffs alleged that this conduct caused or contributed to lifelong tobacco addiction. No tobacco manufacturers were named as defendants.
After years of extensive discovery, including depositions, written discovery, and medical evaluations, the Estate moved for summary judgment on statute-of-limitations grounds. The Estate argued that the plaintiffs’ own admissions established that they knew, years before filing suit, that smoking was harmful to their health, that they had become addicted to smoking, and/or that they were experiencing health conditions they attributed to smoking.
The Estate argued that these undisputed facts established that the plaintiffs’ claims accrued no later than when they left the group home and reached age 18. Because the plaintiffs waited more than 20 years to pursue their claims, the Estate argued that the claims were barred as a matter of law under RCW 4.16.100 and RCW 4.16.080(2).
The Court granted the Estate’s motion for summary judgment as to 11 claims. The Court agreed that the plaintiffs were aware that they had been provided cigarettes, understood the harmful effects of smoking, and were aware of potential smoking-related injuries years before commencing the action. The Court further concluded that the plaintiffs failed to exercise due diligence in investigating and pursuing their claims.
The plaintiffs thereafter moved for reconsideration of the ruling, asserting, among other things, that the Court’s ruling should not apply to all plaintiffs. The Court denied the motion, affirming the summary judgment in favor of the Estate.
The victory highlights Taylor Anderson’s experience defending clients in complex litigation. The firm’s successful statute-of-limitations defense brought decades-old tobacco addiction claims against its client to an end.
