The trial on claims by the state of Vermont that R.J. Reynolds Co. misled consumers about the health risks of smoking a new kind of cigarette resumes Monday at Chittenden Superior Court in Burlington after a two-month hiatus.

The state, which is arguing the case on behalf of 36 states, contends that Reynolds has marketed Eclipse, a cigarette that heats rather than burns tobacco, as safer than conventional cigarettes despite having no scientific evidence to back its advertising claims.

Judge Dennis Pearson presided over 20 days of testimony in the case in October and, in a ruling late last month, said he will allow Reynolds five more days to wrap up its defense against the state’s claims.

Based on recent court filings, Reynolds lawyers intend to focus part of this week’s testimony on an 11-year-old statement by the Attorney General’s Office that criticized the company for not doing more to promote Premier, another “safer” cigarette it had developed.

“Except for a brief test in several cities, Reynolds did not market its safer product, Premier,” a portion of the 1998 lawsuit said.

Reynolds lawyers contend the statement is important because it is at odds with the state’s claim in the present case that it has gone too far in its marketing of Eclipse. Lawyers and a spokesman for the tobacco firm did not respond to requests for comment last week.

State lawyers had unsuccessfully fought to keep the statement from being introduced in the case, arguing it was irrelevant to the matter at hand. Pearson rejected the state’s argument and ruled that Reynolds could use the statement.

“What weight the court will give these assertions, if any, is not decided here,” Pearson wrote in his ruling.

Julie Brill, an assistant attorney general, said the statement cited by the Reynolds lawyers has no bearing on the state’s case and that the wording in Pearson’s ruling suggests the judge was not convinced of the relevance of the statement to the present case.

“We trust that the amount of evidence we have introduced shows that their claims about Eclipse are not substantiated in any scientifically applicable fashion,” Brill said.

Unlike the big tobacco litigation of a decade ago, Vermont and the other 35 states are not seeking financial damages in this case. Instead, they want Pearson to issue an injunction to stop the Eclipse advertising campaign.

Eclipse has had marginal marketing success nationally and is no longer sold at stores in Vermont. According to Reynolds lawyers, only 420 cartons of Eclipse were sold in Vermont between 2000 and 2007.