Multiple choice

Directions: Read the passage/argument and answer the question that follows it.

In a closely watched decision, the US Supreme Court overturned damages of $79.5m against Philip Morris that were awarded by a jury in 2007. The case was about an Oregon man who had smoked for 42 years and died of lung cancer. The Supreme Court decreed that the jury award to his widow had overstepped the mark by punishing the cigarette-maker for harm done to others, but it failed to set any ceiling on future punitive-damage awards and sent the case back to state of Oregon Supreme Court for a new hearing.

Which of the following is the most serious objection to the ruling of the US Supreme Court?

  1. The Supreme Court has quashed a decision given by one of its lower courts.

  2. The court has left the entire field open by not defining how much is too much.

  3. The case has been decided by the court without referring to similar precedents.

  4. The court has adjudicated upon a case involving a medical question without referring it to a medical panel.

  5. The award of the court has the potential to render bankrupt one of the most important players in the cigarette industry.
Reveal answer Fill a bubble to check yourself
B Correct answer
Explanation

In principle and in practice both, a higher court does have the authority to quash a decision given by its lower courts. Adjudicating upon appeals from lower courts is what it is meant for. In principle, it cannot be faulted on this ground, hence, ruling out option (1). Option (3) is not justified either within the context or outside of it. The case did not involve a medical question. It is certain that the man in question had died of lung cancer due to heavy cigarette smoking. The real question is that of deciding to what extent the company responsible for harm done to a man and its liability in this regard. Option (4), therefore, is incorrect. Option (5) addresses a very secondary question, which is definitely taken into account while awarding punitive damages but it is certainly not a major factor. It is mainly the gravity of the offence that is being discussed. 

Keep practicing — related questions