Logourl black
From our private database of 12,700+ case briefs...

Mount Sinai School of Medicine v. American Tobacco Co.

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
880 F.2d 1520 (2d Cir. 1989)


Facts

American Tobacco Co. (defendant) and several other tobacco companies were named as defendants in multiple product liability lawsuits, in which the plaintiffs claimed that their decedents died of lung cancer as a result of the combination of cigarette smoking and exposure to asbestos. The defendant tobacco companies, based on their belief that the plaintiffs intended to rely on a well-known paper describing medical findings of a tobacco use and asbestos exposure study written by the Mount Sinai School of Medicine (Mount Sinai) (plaintiff), issued a subpoena to gain access to all of the documents the study relied on to come to its conclusion. Mount Sinai moved to quash the first set of subpoenas (Page subpoenas), served in connection with Page v. Lincoln Electric Co., Inc. (1986), because they were too broad. The court granted the motion through its holding in In re R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 518 NYS 2d 729 (1987) (Reynolds), finding that the subpoenas were sweeping and indiscriminate, and that complying with the subpoenas would be oppressive to Mount Sinai. Shortly after the holding in Reynolds, the tobacco companies issued a second set of subpoenas seeking the same study information in connection with two additional, similar product liability lawsuits. These subpoenas were more precise, and allowed for the redaction of confidential information. Mount Sinai again moved to quash, alleging res judicata, collateral estoppel, and scholar/expert privilege. It also moved for a protective order on the material. The court granted the protective order but denied the motion to quash, and Mount Sinai appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Kearse, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 120,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 12,700 briefs, keyed to 172 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.