Asbestos Cases A–Z: I

484 decisions whose name begins with I.

• Hardman v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court dismissed the plaintiffs' fraudulent misrepresentation and conspiracy/concert action claim against Bristol-Myers Squibb, denied the rest of BMS's motion to strike the complaint, and left the other causes of action in place.
• Proctor v. Burnham (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Burnham LLC's motion for summary judgment dismissing the Proctors' complaint and all cross-claims, so plaintiffs prevailed on the motion.
• Rosen v. Genuine Parts Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted Genuine Parts Company's and National Automotive Parts Association's motion to dismiss plaintiff Michael Rosen's claims and all cross-claims against them for lack of personal jurisdiction, and severed and dismissed them.
• Carlstrand v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied defendant American Biltrite, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims, finding fact issues on general and specific causation.
• Rosen v. VWR Int'l (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied defendant VWR International's motion to vacate the note of issue, so plaintiff Michael Rosen's case stays trial-ready and VWR must finish any remaining discovery before trial.
• Carlstrand v. Mannington Mills (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The trial court denied defendant Mannington Mills, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims, so the plaintiffs' claims against it continue.
• Carlstrand v. Domco Prods. of Texas (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Domco Products of Texas's motion for summary judgment on causation, so the claims against it continue, but granted it summary judgment dismissing the punitive damages claim against it.
• Gladyszewski v. Whittaker, Clark & Daniels (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted Whittaker, Clark & Daniels' summary judgment motion only as to claims about talc supplied to Colgate-Palmolive, and denied it as to talc supplied to Kaiser Gypsum for joint compound, so those claims proceed against WCD.
• English v. Johnson & Johnson (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.'s motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims against them for lack of personal jurisdiction, ruling against plaintiffs English and Raso.
• Serrano v. Superior Boiler Works (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Superior Boiler Works, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs Sonia Serrano and the estate of Salomon Serrano may take their claims against it to trial.
• Surace v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The trial court denied American Biltrite, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the Surace plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims, finding fact issues on general and specific causation.
• Djokic v. Steel Grip (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Steel Grip's summary judgment motion on causation but granted it as to the spousal loss of consortium claim, dismissing Venetia Kontogouris's individual claim; plaintiffs largely prevailed.
• Hernandez v. Whittaker, Clark & Daniels (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted Whittaker, Clark & Daniels' summary judgment motion only for claims after 2004 and for talc sold to Johnson & Johnson for Baby Powder in 1976-1983, and denied it otherwise, so plaintiffs' claims over talc supplied to Avon for 1960-2004 and punitive damages go to trial.
• Peralta v. Cyprus Amax Minerals Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied plaintiffs' motion to reargue and, on reargument, to vacate its March 11, 2019 order dismissing Cyprus Amax Minerals Company for lack of personal jurisdiction, so CAMC stayed dismissed.
• Babcock v. Watts Water Technologies (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Watts Water Technologies, Inc.'s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and granted plaintiffs' cross-motion to add Watts Regulator Company as a defendant, denying the cross-motion's request for costs and fees.
• DeRozieres v. Munaco Sealing Solutions (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Munaco Sealing Solutions, Inc.'s motion to dismiss the complaint and cross claims for lack of personal jurisdiction, so the plaintiffs prevailed on the motion.
• Dembski v. Aurora Pump Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted defendant Aurora Pump Company's motion to dismiss plaintiff Dembski's claims and all cross-claims against it for lack of personal jurisdiction, and severed and dismissed them.
• Tavernite v. Taco (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Taco, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs' complaint and cross-claims, because conflicting testimony between Taco's product manager and Mr. Tavernite raised credibility issues for trial.
• Alleyne v. Revlon (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted Revlon's summary judgment motion only as to the conspiracy cause of action, denied it on the remaining claims, denied plaintiff Alleyne's cross-motion to compel discovery, and granted Revlon a protective order.
• Alleyne v. Whittaker Clark & Daniels (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted Whittaker Clark & Daniels' summary judgment motion only as to punitive damages, claims after 2004, and Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder claims for 1986-1997, and denied it otherwise, so plaintiff Alleyne's remaining talc claims go to trial.
• Godfrey v. Kaiser Gypsum Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted Kaiser Gypsum's motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims and all cross claims against it for lack of personal jurisdiction, severing and dismissing them; the plaintiffs lost as to Kaiser Gypsum.
• Shea v. Aurora Pump Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Aurora Pump Company's motion to dismiss the complaint and all cross claims for lack of personal jurisdiction, so the Shea plaintiffs' claims against Aurora go forward.
• Alleyne v. Chanel (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Chanel, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff Beverley Alleyne's complaint and cross-claims, finding triable issues of fact.
• English v. Colgate Palmolive Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Colgate Palmolive's motion to vacate the Special Master's recommendation and move the case to the FIFO docket, and confirmed the recommendation keeping plaintiffs English and Rasso in the In-Extremis trial cluster.
• Epstein v. Exxon Mobil Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court applied Texas's causation standard to plaintiffs' claims against Exxon Mobil but denied Exxon's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs' claims against Exxon went forward to trial.
• Epstein v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted the Port Authority's summary judgment motion in part, dismissing the strict products liability, loss of consortium and punitive damages claims, but denied it on common law negligence and Labor Law § 200, which plaintiffs won on and which go forward.
• Gayoso v. Nissan North America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Nissan North America's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding the defense waived, and denied its alternative request to preclude plaintiffs' causation expert and for summary judgment on causation, so plaintiffs prevailed.
• Srica v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied American Biltrite, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims, finding fact issues on general and specific causation.
• Chalco v. Burnham (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted Burnham, LLC's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the plaintiffs' claims and all cross-claims against Burnham, because plaintiffs did not show the decedent was exposed to asbestos from Burnham boilers; claims against the other defendants continue.
• Goodheart v. Kohler Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied defendant Kohler Co.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross-claims, so plaintiffs Robert and Maureen Goodheart's claims against Kohler go forward.
• Mercatante v. PACCAR (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted PACCAR's summary judgment motion only to dismiss the spousal loss of consortium claim and denied the rest, so the plaintiffs' injury, wrongful death and cross-claims against PACCAR continue.
• Jackson v. CertainTeed Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied CertainTeed Corporation's motion for summary judgment, so the estate of Stephen Jackson's claims and all cross-claims against CertainTeed go forward to trial.
• Young v. Avon Prods. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted Avon Products' summary judgment motion only as to the conspiracy and loss of consortium claims, which were dismissed, and denied it on causation and punitive damages, so the plaintiffs' claims proceed to trial.
• Albin v. Mannington Mills (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Mannington Mills, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the Albins' complaint and all cross-claims against it, so the plaintiffs prevailed on the motion.
• Linsky v. Mannington Mills (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The trial court denied Mannington Mills, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff Allison Linsky's complaint and all cross-claims, finding issues of fact on general and specific causation.
• Decanio v. Kohler Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied defendant Kohler Co.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims, so the plaintiffs' claims against Kohler go forward.
• Young v. Whittaker, Clark & Daniels (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The trial court denied defendant Whittaker, Clark & Daniels' motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs Kim and J.C. Young's claims, including punitive damages, proceed to trial.
• Babcock v. CBS Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted defendants CBS and General Electric's motion to compel nonparty Memorial Sloan Kettering to produce Arnold Babcock's original pathology materials, denied the hospital's cross-motion for a protective order, and denied CBS and GE's request for sanctions and costs.
• Lewis v. QCP (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The trial court denied QCP, Inc.'s (f/k/a Bakers Pride Oven Co.) motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross-claims, so plaintiffs Stanley and Veronica Lewis won this motion.
• Young v. Avon Prods. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied plaintiffs' motion to vacate the Special Master's recommendation and for a protective order, confirmed it, and allowed defendant Avon's expert to perform SEM testing on plaintiffs' expert's samples.
• Licul v. Mario DiBono Plastering Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The trial court denied defendant Mario DiBono Plastering Co.'s motion for summary judgment, so the plaintiffs' claims and the cross-claims against it go forward.
• Gallagher v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied American Biltrite, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the Gallagher plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims, so the plaintiffs' claims against it go forward.
• Leavitt v. Rogers Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Rogers Company's motion for summary judgment and its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, so the Leavitts' claims against it continue; the plaintiffs' cross-motion for jurisdictional discovery was denied as moot.
• Marzigliano v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The trial court denied defendant American Biltrite, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the Marzigliano plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims, finding fact issues on general and specific causation.
• Czulada v. Aurora Pump Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Aurora Pump Company's motion to dismiss the complaint and cross-claims for lack of personal jurisdiction, so the Czulada plaintiffs prevailed on the motion.
• Linsky v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied American Biltrite, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff Allison Linsky's complaint and all cross-claims, finding fact issues on general and specific causation.
• Mantovi v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted American Biltrite, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the Mantovi plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims against it.
• Christy v. A.O. Smith Water Prods. Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion in part, consolidating eight lung cancer cases into four pairs for trial and ordering the other FIFO cases tried individually over the defendants' opposition.
• Olson v. Imerys Talc America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court denied Imerys Talc America and Cyprus Amax Minerals' motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, so plaintiffs Donna and Robert Olson's claims against them continue.
• Ombramonti v. Morse Diesel (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The trial court denied general contractor Morse Diesel's motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff Franco Ombramonti's complaint and all cross-claims, finding triable issues of fact.