Category: Summary Judgment

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 …

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.…

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 …

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, …

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 …

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 …