Category: New York

Case Decisions / Consolidation / New York
Posted by:

Duty to Warn Exists for Manufacturer of Products Required to be Used With Third Party Asbestos-Containing Products

Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation (Dummitt v A.W. Chesterton, et al.), June 28, 2016

The plaintiff, Doris Kay Dummitt, filed suit in the New York Supreme Court, alleging her husband, Ronald Dummitt, was diagnosed with and passed away from mesothelioma from asbestos exposure as a result of work as a Navy boiler technician from 1960 to 1977. Plaintiff commenced this negligence and strict liability claim against Crane Co. and various other defendants who manufactured asbestos-containing gaskets, packing and insulation. In the course …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Consolidation / New York
Posted by:

Highest Court of New York Refuses to Consider Defendant’s Argument That Joint Trial was Improper Because Defendant Failed to Preserve Issue for Appeal

In the 1970s, the plaintiff’s decedent, Dave John Konstantin, worked as a carpenter at two Manhattan construction sites where defendant Tishman Liquidating Corporation (TLC) was the general contractor. The decedent died of mesothelioma in 2012. This case was assigned with nine other cases to an in extremis trial calendar; all 10 plaintiffs were represented by the same firm and requested a joint trial, which the defendants opposed. Seven of the 10 cases (all with mesothelioma) were ordered to be tried together, and the remaining three …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / New York
Posted by:

$6.25 million Jury Verdict In NYCAL Case Against Boiler Manufacturers

On June 13, 2016 a NYCAL jury awarded plaintiff $6.25 million for the death of the decedent, Vincent Geritano, who had been diagnosed with mesothelioma. The only defendants remaining at trial were Burnham and Crown Boiler Co.  The jury found Burnham liable, but not Crown. Burnham was assessed 9 percent liability, with several other entities sharing the remainder of the liability.

Read the verdict sheet here.…

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / New York / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Summary Judgment Granted to Various Defendants For Lack of Product Identification Despite Inclusion in Interrogatory Responses in Take-Home Exposure Case

In this case, it was alleged that the decedent was exposed to asbestos from laundering her husband, Eugene Blamowski’s, work clothes. Mr. Blamowski worked as a laborer at Bethlehem Steel from 1955-84, with the exception of his Army service from 1958-62. He and the decedent were married in 1965 and the decedent had laundered his clothes since that time. Several defendants, including Frontier Insulation Contractors, Beazer East, Riley Power, Inc., and Buffalo Pumps, Inc., moved for summary judgment based on lack of product identification and …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Consolidation / New York
Posted by:

Applying Factors Outlined by the Second Circuit, New York Court Refuses to Consolidate Three Asbestos Cases for Trial

The plaintiffs moved to consolidate three cases for trial. Defendants American Biltrite and Kaiser Gypsum opposed. The court denied the plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate.

Courts consider six factors outlined by the Second Circuit in determining whether or not to consolidate individual plaintiffs’ cases for a joint trial where asbestos exposure is alleged: “(1) whether the plaintiffs worked at a common or similar worksite; (2) whether the plaintiffs had similar occupations, as a ‘worker’s exposure to asbestos must depend mainly on his occupation,’ such as those …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / New York / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Trial Court Denies Mechanical Contractor’s Motion for Summary Judgment Opposed by Co-Defendants

The plaintiff sued the defendants for his mesothelioma allegedly contracted from his work at the Northpoint Power Station in Northport, Long Island. Mechanical contractor, O’Connor, moved for summary judgment as to the plaintiff’s claims and cross claims. The motion was opposed by co-defendants National Grid and National Grid USA Service Company.

O’Connor maintained that summary judgment is appropriate because the plaintiff did not identify O’Connor in his Interrogatories and deposition testimony. However, the co-defendants opposed, stating that their affidavits submitted create a sufficient issue of …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / Expert Challenges / Motions in Limine / New York
Posted by:

Citing New York Case Law, Court Denies Crane Co.’s Motion in Limine to Preclude ‘Each and Every Exposure’ Opinion

This opinion addressed potential causation testimony offered by the plaintiffs in two cases. In one case, the plaintiff’s decedent died of mesothelioma prior to being deposed. The decedent’s nephew and co-worker testified during deposition that his uncle was exposed to asbestos while working as a sheet metal worker at shipyards, and while installing furnaces, from the 1960s-70s. His testimony included exposure to insulation, packing, gaskets, and pipe covering used in connection with Crane valves. In the second case, the decedent, a career Navy man, died …

Continue Reading
Insurance Coverage / New York
Posted by:

New York Court of Appeals Opts for “All Sums” Allocation in Asbestos Coverage Case

In a landmark ruling, the New York Court of Appeals held that “all sums” allocation and vertical exhaustion applied in a case involving coverage for injuries related to asbestos exposure. The court based its holding on the language of the insurance policies, which included non-cumulation clauses or non-cumulation and prior insurance provisions.

The plaintiffs, Viking Pumps, Inc. and Warren Pumps, LLC acquired pump manufacturing businesses from Houdaille Industries in the 1980s. These acquisitions later subjected Viking and Warren to significant potential liability in connection with …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / New York / Summary Judgment
Posted by:

Highest New York Court Refuses to Pierce Corporate Veil, Citing Lack of Evidence Establishing Ford USA’s Part in the Chain of Distribution of Ford UK Products

The plaintiff alleged exposure to asbestos-containing brakes, clutches and engine parts while working on Ford tractors and passenger cars in Ireland. The plaintiff and his wife brought suit after he developed peritoneal mesothelioma. Ford USA moved for summary judgment, arguing the parts to which the plaintiff alleged exposure were manufactured, distributed and sold by its wholly-owned subsidiary, Ford UK. Ford USA further argued the complaint was devoid of allegations supporting the claim that the court should pierce the corporate veil. While there was no basis …

Continue Reading
Case Decisions / New York / Significant Verdicts / Verdict Reduction
Posted by:

New York Judge Vacates Award of Past and Future Pain and Suffering to Plaintiff Against Brake Grinder Manufacturer and Orders New Trial on Damages Unless Plaintiff Stipulates to Reduced Awards

The plaintiff, Walter Miller, filed suit against a number of defendants alleging that his mesothelioma was caused by exposure to asbestos through his use of a brake grinding machine manufactured by Ammco. At trial, the jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and against the sole defendant remaining at trial, Hennessy Industries, Inc. (Ammco), in the amount of $25 million, consisting of $10 million for past pain and suffering and $15 million for future pain and suffering. A summary of that verdict can …

Continue Reading