In a February 22, 2016 decision, the Honorable Peter H. Moulton, J.S.C. of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment in a case where the plaintiff-decedent was allegedly exposed to asbestos during a lengthy career as a longshoreman on at certain New York City piers. During the pertinent period, the moving defendant was alleged to be the manufacturer of two asbestos-containing products (i.e., a pelletized product and a phenolic molding compound). The plaintiff …
Continue ReadingCategory: New York
Airplane Manufacturer Granted Dismissal in N.Y. Federal Court Action for Lack of Jurisdiction Even Though Registered to do Business and Appointed an Agent for Service of Process
In this federal court case, it was alleged that the decedent, Walter Brown, was exposed to asbestos while serving as an airplane mechanic in the U.S. Air force from 1950-1970. During that time, he worked at various bases in Europe and in the U.S. in Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, New Mexico, and Michigan. Prior to his passing, the decedent, who was living in Alabama, sued 14 companies, including Lockheed Martin Corporation in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama. A motion …
Continue ReadingDefendants, Miners and Suppliers of Talc, Granted Motions to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Claim of Market Share Liability as Manufacturer of the Product was Identifiable
In this case, it is alleged that the plaintiff, Keri Logiudice, contracted mesothelioma from her use of Cashmere Bouquet cosmetic talcum powder. The defendants, Cyprus Amax Minerals and Imerys Talc America Inc., mined and supplied talc to Colgate, the manufacturer of Cashmere Bouquet, and moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s sixth cause of action for market share liability.
In its decision, the court explained: “In a products liability action, identification of the exact defendant whose product injured the plaintiff is generally required (see Hymowitz v Eli …
Continue ReadingSeveral Defendants Not Named in Plaintiffs’ Interrogatory Answers Move for Summary Judgment With Various Results
In this case, the plaintiff, Mark Denison, claimed exposure to asbestos from numerous products while working at his father’s hardware store from 1964-65 to 1969, Dunkirk Radiator from 1972 to 1987, and from his own automotive repair business from 1980 to the early 1990s. Defendants Bird, Inc., Euclid-Hitachi Heavy Equipment, Inc., F.E. Myers, Oshkosh Corporation, and WT/HRC Corporation all moved for summary judgment.
In its ruling, the court highlighted that none of the moving defendants were identified in the plaintiffs’ answers to interrogatories. The court …
Continue ReadingSummary Judgment Awarded to Pump Manufacturer for Alleged Exposure to Pump Component Parts Manufactured by Third-Parties
In Holzworth v. Alfa Laval, et al. 12-CV-06088 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 21, 2016), Southern District of New York Judge John Keenan granted defendant Ingersoll-Rand’s summary judgment motion arising out of the plaintiff’s alleged exposure to asbestos aboard the U.S.S. Sheldrake. The plaintiff’s decedent had testified that he was exposed to pumps aboard the ship as a bystander and by cleaning them. He did not specifically describe their pumps’ composition, but claimed that he scraped asbestos-containing packing from the jackets. He further testified that many of the …
Continue ReadingNYCAL Court Permits Discovery of Non-Party Co-Author of Article Analyzing Verdicts in Association with Consolidated Trials
In this NYCAL case, Justice Peter Moulton denied the defendants’ motion seeking to quash a subpoena served by Weitz & Luxenberg P.C. upon Mr. Marc Scarcella of Bates, White LLC, an economic consulting firm. Mr. Scarcella co-authored an article entitled, “The Consolidation Effect: New York City Asbestos Verdicts, Due Process and Judicial Economy.” In summary, the article analyzed verdicts in association with consolidated trials in NYCAL.
In denying the motion to quash, the court began its opinion by noting that the Defendants “concede[d] that [the …
Continue ReadingPrior Release Found Inadequate to Dismiss Future Jones Act/FELA Claims Based on Development of Mesothelioma
In this NYCAL case, the Maritime Asbestos Legal Clinic originally filed a suit in 1997 on behalf of the decedent, Mason South, in the Northern District of Ohio. The decedent served in the Merchant Marines from 1945 to 1982. Less than two months later the case settled, with Texaco Inc. being one of the settled defendants. In 2014, the decedent was diagnosed with and died from complications related to mesothelioma. In 2015, the decedent’s wife commenced another action under the Jones Act arising from her …
Continue ReadingPreviously Dismissed Federal Maritime Case Against Ship Owners on Personal Jurisdiction Grounds Subsequently Dismissed in NYCAL; Court Finds There Was No Tolling of Statute of Limitations
In this NYCAL decision, it was alleged that the decedent, Eugene Quinlan, was exposed to asbestos and developed lung cancer from his work as a career merchant mariner. The case was originally filed in 1997 in the Northern District of Ohio for a non-malignant asbestos disease. The decedent subsequently developed lung cancer and the case was assigned to the MultiDistrict Litigation (MDL), which included the Maritime Docket cases (MARDOC), and laid dormant for seventeen years. In 2014, the case was assigned to the Eastern District …
Continue ReadingDecedent’s Incomplete Testimony Found Sufficient to Overcome Summary Judgment as Pump Manufacturer Should Have Re-noticed His Deposition to Question Him Prior to His Death
In this NYCAL case, it is alleged that the decedent, Warren Taveniere, was exposed to asbestos while working aboard several vessels as a Merchant Marine for Moore McCormack Lines from 1953 to 1955. The plaintiff’s interrogatory responses included Aurora Pump Company and at his deposition, the decedent testified that he used asbestos-containing gaskets and packing on Aurora pumps. After four hours the deposition was adjourned due to the decedent’s failing health and Aurora’s counsel had not yet had the opportunity to question him. The decedent’s …
Continue ReadingNew York Federal Court Grants Auto Repair Parts Defendants’ Motion to Transfer Case to Florida Federal Court
In this federal case, the plaintiff brought an action against defendants BASF Catalysts LLC, Superior Materials, Inc. and Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, Inc. for the asbestos exposure and death of her husband, Pedro Rosado-Rivera. The plaintiff alleges that each defendant sold an asbestos-containing auto body repair filler that the decedent worked with at auto shops in New York, Puerto Rico, and Florida. The defendants moved to transfer the case to The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
The court granted the …
Continue Reading