Asbestos Cases A–Z: I

484 decisions whose name begins with I.

• ALBIN v. AJAX MAGNETHERMIC CORPORATION (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion in part, consolidating 18 of the in extremis asbestos cases into eight groups for joint trial over the defendants' opposition and ordering the remaining six cases tried individually.
• Knudsen v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate for trial and ordered eight of the eighteen in extremis cases tried jointly in four pairs over the defendants' opposition, with the remaining cases to be tried individually.
• Figueroa v. Waukesha Cherry-Burrell (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted plaintiff Figueroa's motion to compel only to the extent of ordering Waukesha Cherry-Burrell to produce the tagged product cards within five days, and denied sanctions, costs and attorney fees.
• Germain v. Johnson & Johnson (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2019). The court granted plaintiffs' motion only to allow use at trial of Dr. Longo's October 2018 report, vacating the Special Master's preclusion as to that report, confirmed preclusion of any later Longo reports, and denied the rest, so plaintiffs won in part and Johnson & Johnson won in part.
• Germain v. Johnson & Johnson (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The trial court denied Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.'s motion for summary judgment, so the plaintiffs' negligence, strict liability, consortium and punitive damages claims go to trial.
• Rothlein v. Johnson & Johnson (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The trial court granted Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. summary judgment only on the express warranty claim and the fourth through tenth causes of action (including loss of consortium), and denied it on negligence, strict liability, implied warranty and punitive damages, so those claims by the Rothleins go to trial.
• Nauheimer v. Union Carbide Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted plaintiffs' motion to consolidate the Nauheimer and Roqueta asbestos cases for a joint trial over the defendants' opposition, and placed them on the deceased extremis trial list.
• Prokocimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted R.J. Reynolds and Hollingsworth & Vose partial summary judgment dismissing only the spouse's loss of consortium claim, and denied dismissal of the failure to warn and punitive damages claims, so plaintiff Lois Prokocimer won on those.
• Shulman v. Imerys Talc America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court denied Imerys Talc America's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, so plaintiffs' claims against it continue, and dismissed the claims against Cyprus Amax Minerals Co. because they had already been dismissed on unopposed summary judgment.
• Hooper-Lynch v. Imerys Talc America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court denied Imerys Talc America and Cyprus Amax Minerals' motion to dismiss plaintiff Desiree Hooper-Lynch's claims and all cross-claims for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding specific jurisdiction under CPLR 302(a)(1).
• Holleman v. Cosmetics Specialties (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court denied Cosmetics Specialties, Inc.'s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, so plaintiff Karlene Holleman's claims and all crossclaims against it continue.
• Johnson v. Aurora Pump Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted Aurora Pump Company's motion to dismiss the complaint and all cross-claims against it for lack of personal jurisdiction, so the plaintiff lost as to Aurora.
• Isernia v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The trial court denied American Biltrite, Inc.'s (Amtico) motion for summary judgment, so the plaintiffs' claims and all cross-claims against Amtico stay in the case.
• Swanson v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The trial court denied American Biltrite, Inc.'s (Amtico) motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the Swansons' complaint and all cross-claims against it.
• Macaluso v. A.O. Smith Water Prods. Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court upheld the jury's liability verdict against A.O. Smith (with Peerless and Burnham) but found the pain-and-suffering and loss-of-parental-guidance awards excessive, ordering a new trial on damages unless plaintiff agreed to reduced amounts.
• In re New York City Asbestos Litigation (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted Jenkins Bros.'s motion in part, vacating the Special Master's ruling on deposition questions #1 and #2 and barring those answers, but confirmed the Special Master's ruling requiring answers to questions #3-8 and found no protective order needed for #9 and #10.
• Black v. Imerys Talc America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court denied the motion of Imerys Talc America and Cyprus Amax Minerals to dismiss the claims of Mary and David Black for lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens, so the plaintiffs won and the moving defendants lost.
• Crozier v. Johnson & Johnson (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The trial court granted Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.'s motion to dismiss the Croziers' complaint and cross-claims for lack of personal jurisdiction, and denied jurisdictional discovery.
• Grabowski v. The Scotts Miracle-Gro Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint and all cross-claims against it for lack of personal jurisdiction, so the plaintiff lost as to that defendant.
• Lindsey v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted Colgate-Palmolive's forum non conveniens motion and dismissed the action without prejudice, on condition that Colgate stipulate to accept service in Indiana, Ohio or Illinois and waive limitations and jurisdictional defenses; if it does not, the motion is denied.
• Cohen v. Imerys Talc America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted summary judgment to Imerys Talc America, Inc. and Cyprus Amax Minerals Company, dismissing the Cohen plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims against them because they were not successors to the talc suppliers.
• Botta v. AERCO Int'l (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted plaintiffs' motion to consolidate in part, ordering the Botta and Anderson cases tried jointly and the Agovino and Panetta cases tried individually, over defendants' opposition.
• Gibson v. Mack Trucks (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court denied Mack Trucks, Inc.'s motion to dismiss the plaintiff's claims and all cross-claims for lack of personal jurisdiction, holding the defense was waived because it was not raised in its answer.
• Black v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The trial court denied Colgate-Palmolive's motion to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds, so plaintiffs Mary and David Black's case stays in New York.
• Chen v. Nissan North America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court denied Nissan North America's and Volkswagen Group of America's motion to vacate the Special Master's jurisdictional discovery recommendation, confirmed it, and ordered them to respond to plaintiffs' discovery within 30 days.
• Chen v. Volkswagen Group of America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The trial court denied Volkswagen Group of America's and Nissan North America's motions for summary judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction, and denied the forum non conveniens motions of those two companies and Ford, so plaintiffs kept their New York forum.
• Macaluso v. Carrier Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted non-party settled defendant Carrier Corporation's motion to quash defendant Peerless Industries' trial subpoena ad testificandum, denied Carrier's request for costs, and allowed Peerless to use Carrier's interrogatories and deposition at trial under the CMO.
• Macaluso v. Burnham (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court quashed defendant Burnham LLC's trial subpoena for a Trane representative, granting settled non-party Trane's motion in part, denied Trane's request for costs, and allowed Burnham to use Trane's interrogatory answers and deposition at trial.
• Appleton v. Allied Signal (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2017). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion in part, consolidating the Appleton and Howell cases for a joint trial and ordering the Watts, Kertesz and Vanderhall cases tried individually, over the defendants' opposition.
• Brooks v. AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2017). The court granted in part the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate eighteen asbestos actions for trial, ordering six consolidated groups of two or three plaintiffs and trying five other plaintiffs individually, over the defendants' opposition.
• Brown v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2017). The court denied plaintiff Phyllis Brown's proposed judgment, which would have made Con Edison liable for Keasbey's 35 percent share, and accepted Con Edison's counter-judgment capping its liability at 30 percent.
• Carilli v. CRANE CO. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2017). The court granted settled party Crane Co.'s motion, quashed defendant Burnham LLC's trial subpoena for a Crane representative, and allowed Burnham to use Crane's interrogatory answers and deposition at trial under the June 20, 2017 case management order.
• Aquitato v. AMCHEM PRODUCTS, INC. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2017). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate in part, grouping some living and some deceased plaintiffs for joint trials and ordering the rest tried individually over the defendants' objections.
• Cerutti v. Baruffaldi S.P.A. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2017). The court denied Baruffaldi's motion to appeal the Special Master's recommendation and for a protective order, and confirmed the recommendation that Baruffaldi produce a witness on New York sales; plaintiffs won.
• Macaluso v. A.O. Smith Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2017). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion only to consolidate the Macaluso and Flood cases for trial, denied consolidation of the Story and Fleigner cases, which are to be tried separately, and ordered the trial sequence, over the defendants' opposition.
• Battistoni v. ITW Food Equipment Group (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2016). The trial court denied defendant ITW Food Equipment Group LLC's motion for summary judgment in its entirety, so plaintiff Dario Battistoni's claims continue.
• DeMartino v. Aurora Pump Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2016). The court denied Aurora Pump Company's motion for summary judgment against plaintiffs Patrick and Joy DeMartino and directed the parties to proceed with discovery before the Special Master.
• LoGiudice v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2016). The court affirmed the Special Master's recommendation and denied plaintiff Keri LoGiudice's motion for relief, leaving Colgate-Palmolive without having to answer her Notice to Admit or her supplemental document request 11.
• Bartolone v. Union Carbide Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2016). The court denied Union Carbide's motion for summary judgment in its entirety, so plaintiff's estate's claims against Union Carbide go forward to trial.
• South v. Texaco (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2016). The court denied Texaco's motion for summary judgment and sanctions, finding Texaco had not shown that Mason South understood his 1997 release covered a future mesothelioma claim, and ordered plaintiff's counsel to disclose the settlement amount.
• Hernandez-Vega v. Fisher Controls Int'l (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2015). The court denied Fisher Controls' motion for summary judgment on plaintiff Hernandez-Vega's claims, but dismissed the breach of warranty, market share liability and concert of action counts, and denied dismissal of the punitive damages count with leave to renew.
• Ricci v. Cleaver-Brooks (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2015). The court denied Cleaver-Brooks' motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff Mark Ricci's complaint and all claims and cross-claims against it, so the plaintiff won and the case goes to trial.
• Ricci v. Crane Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2015). The court denied defendant Crane Co.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff Mark Ricci's complaint and all claims and cross-claims against it.
• Cuzzolino v. A.O. Smith Water Prods. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2015). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate eight asbestos actions into three groups for joint trial, over the defendants' objections.
• Brady v. Crane Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2015). The court granted plaintiffs' motion to consolidate 13 asbestos cases for joint trial only in part: it ordered joint trials for Miceli and Ward, for Carey, Falkenmeyer and Frick, and for Nash and Pettinelli, and ordered Miller, Brady, McCormick, Morgan, Castorina and Padula tried separately, over defendants' objections.
• Flahive v. 3M Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2015). The court granted plaintiffs' motion to consolidate in part, joining the Flahive and Germain actions for one trial and the Izbicki and Jalowski actions for another over defendants' opposition, but ordered the Valensi action tried separately.
• Gayoso v. Fiat USA (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2015). The court denied Fiat USA, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment, with leave to renew after limited discovery, and granted the plaintiffs' cross-motion for that discovery on Fiat USA's relationship with Fiat Auto USA.
• Djokic v. United States Steel Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2015). The court denied US Steel's motion to dismiss the complaint, ruling that Pennsylvania rather than New York workers' compensation law applied, so the plaintiffs' common-law action against US Steel could go forward.
• Storey v. Morse Diesel (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2015). The court denied general contractor Morse Diesel's motion for summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 200 and negligence claims of plaintiffs John and Candace Storey.
• Smyth v. Crane Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (New York Supreme Court, 2015). The trial court denied Crane Co.'s motion for summary judgment, so plaintiff Annie Smyth's claims against Crane continue toward a jury.