HomePress RoomContact Us

The Center for Constitutional Litigation, P.C. is a law firm dedicated to challenging laws that impede access to justice.  CCL attorneys argue key cases in the U.S. Supreme Court and state appellate courts that protect citizens’ rights in the civil justice system.  CCL attorneys have litigated cases on issues such as punitive damages, mandatory arbitration, preemption, the admission of expert evidence, class actions, federalism, court secrecy, and limitations on jury damage awards, among others.  In addition to conducting appellate arguments, CCL is often consulted by attorneys at trial in order to present and argue constitutional issues to preserve those issues for argument at the appellate level.


Breaking News:

Statement of CCL President Robert S. Peck regarding U.S. Supreme Court decision in Philip Morris USA v. Williams on March 31, 2009:

 

"I am thrilled with the Supreme Court’s order today in Philip Morris USA v. Williams. The U.S. Supreme Court came to the correct result in today’s decision. Philip Morris had no basis to claim that the Supreme Court of Oregon had defied them, and the U.S. Supreme Court apparently agreed.

 

It was ten years ago yesterday that a jury decided this case. Within six months of that verdict, cigarette companies admitted for the first time that their products caused cancer. Since that time, Philip Morris has engaged in a war of attrition in the courts – using its superior resources to deny justice through costly delay and endless appeals. Today, we can say that it may be possible to delay justice, but you cannot deny it.

 

On the bigger question of the size of punitive damages, which the Court did not address, it is worth noting that the Court has had three opportunities to make a decision concerning the 97:1 ratio in this case and chose not to. While it is speculation to read anything into that, it does seem that the Court has sent a signal that truly reprehensible misconduct will outweigh concerns about single-digit ratios or comparability with existing fines, which those who seek to avoid full punishment assert."

 

Press Release


 This site is under construction