The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

Even though I smoke the odd cigar and cigarette, I really don‘t like tobacco But I cheered last week when the industry won a big trial in the First Circuit Court of Appeals in New Yorkâ€" and it‘ll end up having repercussions for Canada. What the court said, in simple terms, is that the estate of a man who smoked heavily for 23 years and died of cancer cannot get $3 million from Liggett and Mntal dead ma ?mmgdangu:‘;mokmg _ My prejudices usually run very much victims and their families â€" in personal injury suits but not on this one. But I regret the fact that the judges backed the tobacco industry on a narrow legalistic ground rather than a common sense approach. Why didn‘t the court just say: "Anyâ€" body who has smoked up to three or four packs of cigarettes a day for 23 years and didn‘t know he was endangering his life in favour in the plaintiffs â€" injured Sometimes you must take responsibility {left) and ‘Martin White have brought customâ€"designed voice mail systems to And, on the same note, who smokes, abuses drugs, runs up his cholesterol level or his weight, without doctors giving him ample warning at some time over two decades? What the appeals court said to the estate of the New York City man who died of cancer seven years ago is that the federallyâ€"mandated warnings on cigaâ€" rette packages are ample and protect tobacco companies from product liability of the kind before the court. What I wanted these judges to say is that there are areas of life in which individuals must accept responsibility had to be hiding under a tobacco leaf?" for their behaviour. About The Law held liable for an automobile accident involving one guest who had too much to drink at the party or too many beforeâ€" Owners of bars and restaurants can‘t reasonably be expected to know the blood alcohol level of their patrons when that level passes the point that the government decrees to be illegal. Do you not think that somebody who smokes a lot of cigarettes has to take some responsibility for his or her own health? Should the host of a cocktail party be No question about it: manufacturers ought to pay if they make a car that races out of control when put in reverse, a toy that blows up in a child‘s face or a nightgown that erupts in flames while the wearer is standing in front of a But we need limits on making someâ€" body else liable for racklessness or l_tuf)idity. The courts ought to make this clear. What really gives? How much respon Take a simple electric saw. I tried a case recently on behalf of a manufacturâ€" er who was sued because a gpan who tried to operate it cut off two fingers and claimed the saw should have contained warnings about how dangerous it was The jury in that case found in favour of my client. And ourâ€"argument was sim ple: in certain situations people have to take a certain amount of care for themselves. Doesn‘t that just make for common In this society of speedy communicaâ€" tions, everybody of reasonable know!]â€" edge knows that smoking cigarettes, drinking too much liquor and eating seven steaks a week is dangerous to your health. And if you go to court and ask for a lot of money from the manufacturer of such a product, you should lose your case. Frederick Sage! is a Kitchener lawyer who lives in Waterloo. sibility should courts place on manufac turers who produce products that every body knows are dangerous? _