Judgment against Philip Morris has become a battle of wills -- for courts

WASHINGTON - Tobacco giant Philip Morris USA could be partly freed from a $145 million punitive judgment, from the sounds of some Supreme Court justices Wednesday.

In an epic legal dispute pitting the will of one court against another, conservative justices made clear their dismay over seemingly being ignored by the Oregon Supreme Court. The eventual result could save Philip Morris a lot of money and deliver the Oregon court a rebuke.

Twice before, the Supreme Court has struck down the judgment against Philip Morris and ordered the Oregon court to take another look at the case. Each time, the Oregon high court has upheld the award to Mayola Williams, the widow of a longtime Marlboro smoker.

In its latest appeal, Philip Morris said the Oregon judges were essentially thumbing their noses at the High Court.

"Does the state court sit in judgment on whether [our] orders are in error or not?" Justice Antonin Scalia asked.

Justice David Souter said: "How do we guard against making constitutional decisions which are simply going to be nullified by some clever device?"

Souter, though, also joined Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in pressing questions very critical of Philip Morris' case, and swing-vote Justice Stephen Breyer, who sided with Philip Morris in its last round, suggested a decision might be harder than he originally thought. At first, Breyer said, "I thought this was a runaround. I'm not sure I think that now."

An Oregon jury in March 1999 awarded Williams' widow $79.5 million in punitive damages and more than $500,000 in compensatory damages. The punitive damages came from the jury's conclusion that Philip Morris had made "false representations concerning the causal link between smoking and cancer." The value of the award has climbed to more than $145 million because of interest, the company said. If Philip Morris wins, a new trial would result.

A decision is expected by June.