Bifolck v. Philip Morris, Inc.
Plaintiff, the executor of his wife’s estate, sought damages from the defendant alleging that the cigarettes manufactured by the defendant were defectively designed and this defective design was responsible for the decedent’s cancer and death. The court declined to adopt the Restatement (Third) standard in favor of the dual tests based on § 402A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts. Further, it held that although all product liability claims require proof of a defective condition unreasonably dangerous to the user or consumer, unreasonably dangerous is not determined by consumer expectations under comment (i) to § 402A when such a claim is brought under a theory of negligence. Lastly, it held that statutory punitive damages are not measured by Connecticut’s common-law punitive damages rule.