Wooden judge gavel, close-up view.

HVAC Defendant Summary Judgment Motion on Causation Grounds Denied

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

In this asbestos action, defendant SPX Cooling Technologies Inc., individually and as successor to Marley Cooling Technologies Inc., moved for summary judgment, arguing that plaintiffs failed to establish causation, and that defendant established a prima facie case for a lack thereof under Nemeth.

In its decision denying the motion, the court noted that Marley misstated plaintiff’s burden, as the standard set forth in Nemeth “represent[ed] an extraordinary post-trial remedy to set aside a jury …

Continue Reading
person testifying

Valve Defendant Summary Judgment Motion Denied

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

In this asbestos action, defendant Crosby Valve LLC moved to dismiss the action, alleging that plaintiff, John Holland was not exposed to asbestos from any Crosby product. In opposition, plaintiffs highlighted Holland’s deposition testimony, which identified Crosby as a manufacturer. Plaintiffs also pointed to the purported lack of personal knowledge in Crosby’s supporting affidavit and the testimony of Crosby’s corporate affidavit, which confirmed asbestos-containing Crosby products.

Summary judgment motions are denied if the opposing party …

Continue Reading
Courtroom, Gavel And Law Books

NYCAL Judge Grants Joint Trial of Two Asbestos Cases

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

In this asbestos action, plaintiffs seek to join the Munna and LaMonica cases for joint trial. First, the court noted that the NYCAL CMO provides that two cases may be joined for joint trial if the plaintiffs can meet the Malcolm factors. However, the plaintiffs do not need to meet all of the factors for the court to join the cases for trial. The Malcolm factors include:

(1) common worksites;

(2) similar occupation;

(3) similar time …

Continue Reading
Business and lawyers discussing contract papers with brass scale on desk

Talc Manufacturer’s Removal Motion Denied Joinder; Case Remanded to State Court

Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York; September 18, 2023

Plaintiff Ann Greenberg’s asbestos-related lawsuit against defendants Johnson & Johnson and Kolmar Laboratories asserts that she contracted an asbestos-related disease from her use of Johnson’s Baby Powder, whichshe alleged contained asbestos-contaminated talc.

Johnson & Johnson filed a motion to remove the action to federal court on August 27, 2021, invoking diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Plaintiff opposed, and Johnson & Johnson filed a timely reply alleging the …

Continue Reading
The law concept background.

Defendant Denied Summary Judgment on Punitive Damages for Failure to Provide Case-Specific Support

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

Plaintiff Kevin Burns filed an asbestos-related lawsuit against numerous defendants, including Burnham, testifying that while he worked as a plumber he was exposed to asbestos insulation and rope from the removal and installation of Burnham boilers from approximately 1958 to the early 1980s.

Burnham moved for summary judgment on plaintiff’s punitive-damages claim, arguing that plaintiff failed to establish Burnham’s conduct rose to the level of egregious and morally culpable conduct necessary for an award of punitive damages. …

Continue Reading
Judge chamber with gavel

ALCOA Denied Summary Judgment Where Question of Fact Exists

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

This action was filed on behalf of decedent, Kenneth Last, alleging he was exposed to asbestos while working for general contractor, ALCOA Inc., n/k/a ARCONIC Inc., at the World Trade Center during the 1970s. ALCOA filed a motion for summary judgment arguing the fire-proofing material used at the World Trade Center during decedent’s employment was non-asbestos containing.

The court notes that summary judgment is a drastic remedy and should only be granted if the moving party …

Continue Reading
Wooden judge gavel, close-up view.

Court Denies Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

In this matter, Rockwell Automation, Inc. sought to dismiss the action against them on grounds that the plaintiff was not exposed to asbestos from burners manufactured by its predecessor, Timken-Detroit Axle Company.

When it comes to making a determination as related to a summary judgment motion, the court’s role is “issue-finding, rather than issue-determination.” Sillman v Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 3 NY2d 395, 404, 144 N.E.2d 387, 165 N.Y.S.2d 498 (1957) “The proponent of a summary …

Continue Reading
Law theme. Judge chamber.

Defendant’s Attempt to Obtain Tissue Sample for Digestion Testing Denied

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

In this asbestos action, plaintiff Almando Rodney underwent a pleurectomy. Defendant Mercedez-Benz USA LLC (MBUSA) moved to seek an out-of-state subpoena in order to retrieve a portion of Rodney’s tissue sample from a Florida hospital. MBUSA also moved to permit its expert to perform digestion studies on the tissue block.

The plaintiff opposed on two grounds. Plaintiff noted that the Note of Issue had been filed. In addition, the plaintiff submitted an affidavit from Rodney’s treating …

Continue Reading
Business and lawyers discussing contract papers with brass scale on desk

Judge Finds Question of Fact Regarding Boiler Manufacturer’s Warnings; Denies Motion for Summary Judgment as to Punitive Damages

Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

In this asbestos-related lawsuit, the plaintiff alleged he was exposed to asbestos while working with, and around, boilers manufactured by defendant, Burnham, from 1961 to 1999.

Burnham filed a motion for partial summary judgment as to punitive damages, arguing the plaintiff failed to establish that Burnham’s conduct rose to the level of egregious and morally culpable conduct necessary for an award of punitive damages. According to Burnham, any exposure to asbestos by plaintiff through Burnham boilers were below …

Continue Reading
Courtroom, Gavel And Law Books

Power Companies’ Motion for Summary Judgment Denied

Court: Supreme Court of New York, New York County

Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO) is a subsidiary of Long Island Power Authority (LIPA). LIPA was created “to remedy LILCO’s conduct as a private electric provider” by closing LILCO’s Shoreham Nuclear Power Station — where the plaintiff-decedent was allegedly exposed to asbestos — and saving LILCO customers money by reducing utility costs. 

LIPA and LILCO moved for summary judgment on that basis that the plaintiff failed to (1) bring their claims within the statute of limitations …

Continue Reading