Judge chamber with gavel

First Department Affirms Denial of Pipe Manufacturer’s Motion for Summary Judgment

Court: Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, First Department

In this asbestos action, decedent Rudolf Horvath alleged that he was exposed to asbestos from Bondstrand pipes manufactured by defendant, Ameron International, at a sewage plant in midtown Manhattan. In response, Ameron filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing the sewage plant referenced by decedent must have been the North River wastewater treatment plant, which did not exist until 1985 at a time when Ameron no longer manufactured Bondstrand pipe using asbestos.

The trial court …

Continue Reading
judge's gavel and books

Summary Judgment Granted to Oven Manufacturer on Causation in NYCAL

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

In this action, plaintiff June Savianeso alleges that decedent Michael Savianeso was exposed to asbestos from the products of various defendants.

Decedent passed away without giving deposition testimony. Subsequently, decedent’s brother, James, provided seven days of testimony. As pertinent to this motion, James testified that he worked as a pizza maker at a pizzeria in New Jersey for approximately 30 hours per week from June to August during the summers of 1976 and 1977. James mainly …

Continue Reading
The law concept background.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Joint Trial Denied

Court: Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County (NYCAL)

This asbestos matter involves a motion filed by plaintiff to consolidate two asbestos actions.

In New York, “when actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before a court, the court, upon motion . . .  may order the actions consolidated.” CPLR §602(a) A joint trial should be denied, however, where individual issues predominate over common issues and where the party opposing the joint trial demonstrates substantial prejudice.

Joinder …

Continue Reading
Wooden judge gavel, close-up view.

Motion for Summary Judgment of Valve Manufacturer Denied

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

Plaintiff-Decedent John Gonder alleged exposure to asbestos during his employment as a Con Edison inspector between the 1970s and 1990s. He died in May 2021 at 86 years old from lung cancer. Defendant Jenkins Bros. filed a motion for summary judgment on the basis that Gonder did not identify Jenkins as a manufacturer of asbestos-containing valves to which he alleged exposure. Jenkins also challenged the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s expert reports with respect to causation.

In …

Continue Reading
judge's gavel and books

Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Workers’ Compensation Defense Denied

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

Defendant Morse Diesel Inc. filed a motion for summary judgment on the basis that plaintiff Matthew D’Alessio’s claims were barred by New York State Worker’s Compensation Law. In support of its motion, Morse Diesel pointed to D’Alessio’s deposition testimony in which he claimed to be an employee of Morse Diesel at a jobsite near Brooklyn Law School. In further support, Morse Diesel provided an affidavit from its corporate representative stating that they carry workers’ compensation insurance.…

Continue Reading
judge's gavel and books

Glove Manufacturer Denied Summary Judgment in NYCAL

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

In this asbestos action, decedent Giacinto Pira alleged he was exposed to asbestos from gloves manufactured by defendant Steel Grip.

Steel Grip moved for summary judgment, arguing that plaintiff did not establish exposure to asbestos or causation from Steel Grip gloves. In support, Steel Grip proffered an expert report opining that the levels of asbestos released from their gloves would not be sufficient to cause mesothelioma. Plaintiff opposed Steel Grip’s motion, citing plaintiff’s testimony identifying Steel Grip …

Continue Reading
The law concept background.

Valve Manufacturer Succeeds on Motion for Summary Judgement

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

Plaintiff filed this lawsuit alleging decedent suffered asbestos exposure from numerous product manufacturers during the course of his employment as a mechanic for Con Ed from 1974 to 2012. Prior to his passing, decedent was deposed. Defendant Crosby Valves filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that decedent was not exposed to asbestos from any Crosby product. Specifically, the defendant referenced decedent’s testimony regarding the use of flange gaskets in connection with Crosby valves, …

Continue Reading
Law theme. Judge chamber.

Printing Press Manufacturers’ Motions for Summary Judgment Denied

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County (NYCAL)

In this asbestos action, defendants L3Harris Technologies Inc. and Heidelberg USA Inc. moved separately for summary judgment, arguing that plaintiff Raymond Desiena did not establish exposure to asbestos from his work on Harris or Heidelberg-branded printing presses during his work as a printing press operator from the 1960s-1980s.

Regarding Harris printing presses, Harris noted that Desiena implicated Harris’s printing presses as utilizing asbestos-containing parts — specifically, friction brakes manufactured by Airflex. In response to this …

Continue Reading
judge's gavel and books

Valve Manufacturer’s Motion for Summary Judgment Granted

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County (NYCAL)

In this asbestos action, defendant Crosby Valve LLC moved to dismiss the action on the grounds that plaintiff John B. Daly Jr. was not exposed to asbestos from any Crosby product.

Specifically, Crosby’s motion was based on Daly’s testimony that he was exposed to asbestos from “flange gaskets” used along with Crosby valves, and not actually manufactured by Crosby.

Ultimately, the court determined that Daly’s testimony did not indicate any products manufactured by Crosby, and …

Continue Reading
The law concept background.

Appellate Division Reverses Denial of Door Manufacturer’s Motion to Dismiss

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, First Department

In July 2023, the trial court denied a door manufacturer’s motion to dismiss. Upon appeal, the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department found that defendant T.M. Cobb Company’s motion to dismiss should have been granted for lack of personal jurisdiction.

The court held that “there is no evidence that the fire doors that allegedly caused the decedent plaintiff’s injury by exposing him to asbestos were manufactured in New York.” The court also stated that T.M. …

Continue Reading