New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division: Asbestos Cases

Our case-law library holds 94 asbestos decisions from the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division (1971–2025). Each links to our summary and the full opinion.

• State: New York
• Kind of court: State appeals court

Decisions

• Beagan v. Akebono Brake Corp. (1st Dept., 2025). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of summary judgment to American Honda Motor Co. and Nissan North America, so plaintiff, the decedent's estate administrator, kept New York long-arm jurisdiction over them.
• Kirby v. David Fabricators OF NY, Inc. (1st Dept., 2025). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of David Fabricators' motion to dismiss, so plaintiff Kirby's mesothelioma action against it continues.
• Maffei v. Burnham (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2025). The First Department affirmed the jury-verdict judgment for plaintiffs Romeo and Rosa Maffei against Burnham LLC, including compensatory, consortium and punitive awards, and dismissed the appeal from the post-trial order as subsumed in the judgment.
• Matter of Johnson & Johnson v. Northwell Health Inc. (1st Dept., 2024). The Appellate Division reversed Supreme Court's orders, granting Johnson & Johnson's petition to enforce the out-of-state subpoena against Northwell Health, and denying Dr. Moline's petition to quash while granting the cross-petition to enforce.
• McWilliams v. Jenkins Bros. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2024). The First Department affirmed the denial of Jenkins Bros.' motion for JNOV, a new trial, or remittitur, leaving plaintiff McWilliams' $13,000,000 past and $10,000,000 future pain and suffering verdict intact.
• English v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2024). The First Department reversed the trial court's denial of Colgate-Palmolive's summary judgment motion, granted the motion and dismissed the complaint against Colgate, ruling against the plaintiff executor.
• Seen v. Kaiser Gypsum Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2024). The First Department modified the judgment against Kaiser Gypsum, ordering a new trial on pain and suffering damages unless plaintiff stipulated to reduce the $15 million award to $10 million, remanded to recalculate the judgment for settlement offsets, and otherwise affirmed the verdict for plaintiff.
• Meissner v. Ridge Constr. Corp. (4th Dept., 2024). The Appellate Division vacated the judgment against Lloyd's, and modified the order by denying the Meissners' motion and renewed motion for summary judgment, because fact issues remained on timely notice and on when injury-in-fact occurred; it held the primary policy was exhausted and the loss was a covered occurrence.
• Tippin v. 3M Co., Alcat (1st Dept., 2024). The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's denial of summary judgment and granted Johnson & Johnson, Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc., and LTL Management LLC's motion, dismissing plaintiff Tippin's complaint against them.
• Howard v. AO Smith Water Prods. (3rd Dept., 2023). The Appellate Division modified the order, granting Armstrong Pumps partial summary judgment for exposure before December 20, 1965 (which plaintiffs conceded), and otherwise affirmed the denial of summary judgment, so plaintiffs Howard and his spouse won on the remaining claims.
• Matter of Reid v. National Grid (3rd Dept., 2023). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision setting the decedent's date of disablement at his date of death, March 2, 2019, against the employer and carrier, who appealed, so the claimant's widow's death benefits stood.
• Sason v. Dykes Lumber Co., Inc. (1st Dept., 2023). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of Dykes Lumber Company's summary judgment motion, so plaintiff Raphael Sason's claims against Dykes Lumber continue.
• English v. Avon Prods., Inc. (1st Dept., 2022). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of Shulton's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, so plaintiffs Linda English et al. defeated the motion by Shulton's successor, Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co.
• Matter of Miller v. Mo Maier Ltd. (3rd Dept., 2022). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's denial of the employer Mo Maier Ltd. and its carrier Travelers' applications to reopen the claim, so Travelers remained the liable carrier and the claimant's side prevailed.
• Olson v. Johnson & Johnson (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2022). The First Department reversed the judgment for plaintiffs against Johnson & Johnson and directed entry of judgment for J&J, because plaintiffs' expert proof of causation was legally insufficient; the appeal from the damages-reduction order was dismissed as subsumed.
• Pomponi v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (1st Dept., 2022). The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's order and granted American Biltrite Inc.'s motion for summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiff's complaint and cross claims against it.
• Hildebrand v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2021). The First Department affirmed the denial of the Port Authority's summary judgment motion on the Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims, so plaintiff Seval Morgan's claims against the Port Authority continued.
• Pistone v. American Biltrite, Inc. (2nd Dept., 2021). The Appellate Division reversed the order granting summary judgment to American Biltrite, Inc. and Mannington Mills, Inc., and denied their motions, so the plaintiffs' claims against them continue.
• Fischer v. American Biltrite, Inc. (1st Dept., 2020). The First Department reversed the order granting Burnham's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, denied the motion so plaintiffs won, and dismissed the appeal from the denial of renewal as moot.
• Stock v. Jenkins Bros. (Matter of Eighth Judicial District Asbestos Litigation) (4th Dept., 2020). The Fourth Department unanimously affirmed the order denying both Jenkins Bros.' and plaintiff Lynn Stock's post-trial motions, leaving the jury verdict for plaintiff in place.
• Matter of Gimber v. Eastman Kodak Co. (3rd Dept., 2020). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision denying Eastman Kodak and its carrier's request to apportion the death benefits claim with prior employer International Paper.
• Matter of New York Asbestos Litig. (1st Dept., 2020). The appellate court affirmed the denial of Mario & DiBono Plastering Co.'s motion for summary judgment, so the plaintiffs' claims against it continue.
• Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig. v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (1st Dept., 2020). The First Department upheld the jury's liability verdict against the Federal-Mogul Asbestos Personal Injury Trust (successor to Felt Products) but ordered a new trial on past pain and suffering and past loss of consortium unless plaintiff agreed to reduce those awards to $5.5 million and $650,000.
• Nemeth v. Brenntag N. Am. (1st Dept., 2020). The Appellate Division modified the judgment against Whittaker, Clark & Daniels (WCD) to increase it to $3,300,000 because the trial court had miscalculated the settlement offsets, and otherwise affirmed the plaintiff's jury verdict; one judge dissented and would have entered judgment for WCD.
• Billok v. Union Carbide Corp. (3rd Dept., 2019). The Appellate Division reversed the judgment entered on a jury verdict for Union Carbide and remitted for a new trial, because deposition testimony from other lawsuits was wrongly admitted; plaintiff Billok prevailed on the appeal.
• Ford v. AO Smith Water Products (1st Dept., 2019). The First Department modified the judgment against Burnham LLC, vacating the $2 million future pain and suffering award and ordering a new trial on those damages unless plaintiff stipulated to reduce it to $500,000, and otherwise affirmed the verdict for plaintiff.
• Matter of Miller v. Mo Maier Ltd. (3rd Dept., 2019). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's refusal to consider Travelers' application for review because it used an outdated form, so Travelers and Mo Maier Ltd. lost.
• Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig. (1st Dept., 2019). The Appellate Division reversed the judgment entered on a jury verdict for plaintiff, granted Whittaker Clark & Daniels' motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and dismissed the complaint against it.
• Macaluso v. A.O. Smith Corp. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2019). The First Department affirmed the jury verdict for plaintiff on liability but ordered a new trial on damages unless plaintiff stipulated to further reduce the awards to $4 million for pain and suffering and $1 million for each child's loss of parental guidance.
• Brown v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2019). The Appellate Division reversed the judgment that capped Con Ed's share at 30% and directed an amended judgment apportioning 65% of plaintiff's total recovery against Con Ed, so plaintiff won and Con Ed lost; Con Ed's cross appeal from the denial of summary judgment was dismissed.
• Shanahan v. Aerco Intl., Inc. (1st Dept., 2019). The First Department affirmed the denial of Algoma Hardwoods' motion for summary judgment, so plaintiff Michelle Shanahan's claims against Algoma continue.
• Matter of Claim OF Manocchio v. Abb Combustion Eng'g (3rd Dept., 2017). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision denying the carrier for ABB Combustion Engineering's request to apportion liability among claimant Manocchio's prior employers, so ABB and its carrier lost.
• Matter of Diegelman v. City of Buffalo (4th Dept., 2017). On remittitur from the Court of Appeals, the Appellate Division affirmed the order allowing claimants James R. Diegelman and others to serve a late notice of claim on the City of Buffalo and the other respondents, who lost the appeal.
• Miller v. Hennessy Indus. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2017). The First Department affirmed the judgment entered after a jury trial awarding plaintiff Walter Miller $5 million for past and $4 million for future pain and suffering against Hennessy Industries, which lost its appeal.
• South v. Chevron Corp. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2017). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of Texaco's summary judgment motion, so the widow's Jones Act mesothelioma claims against Texaco (sued as Chevron's alleged predecessor) continued; Texaco lost, with one justice dissenting.
• Krok v. The Nash Engineering Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2017). The Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed the trial court's denial of Nash Engineering Company's motion for summary judgment, so the plaintiff estate's claim against Nash continued.
• Mtr OF Nyc Asbestos Litig. (1st Dept., 2017). The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment for Ford Motor Company, upholding the trial court's order setting aside the jury's verdict for plaintiff Mary Juni, and dismissed the appeal from the order as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.
• O'connor v. Aerco International, Inc. (3rd Dept., 2017). The Appellate Division reversed the three orders that had granted summary judgment to Fisher Scientific, Thomas Scientific and VWR International, and denied their motions, so the plaintiffs' claims against them continue.
• North v. National Grid Generation (IN the Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2016). The First Department affirmed the jury judgment for plaintiff against National Grid ($3.5 million for future pain and suffering), and modified the indemnification order so National Grid also recovers attorneys' fees for defending plaintiff's action against O'Connor, otherwise affirming.
• Sweberg v. Crane Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2016). The First Department reversed the order on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim, granting the defendants' motion and dismissing the complaint on that claim. It also upheld the jury's verdict against Crane Co. on failure to warn and recklessness, but found the future pain and suffering award materially excessive to an extent the text does not state.
• Hackshaw v. Crane Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2016). The First Department affirmed the jury verdict for plaintiff Dorcas Hackshaw (executrix of Selwyn Hackshaw) against Crane Co. on liability, but found the award for past pain and suffering excessive and reduced it to the extent indicated (the figure is not in the text).
• Wells v. 3M Co. (3rd Dept., 2016). The Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court's order granting summary judgment to defendants Genuine Parts Company and National Automotive Parts Association, and denied their motion, so plaintiff Linda Wells's claim survives.
• Finerty v. Abex Corp. (1st Dept., 2015). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of Ford USA's motion for summary judgment, but reversed the denial of Ford UK's motion and dismissed the complaint against Ford UK for lack of personal jurisdiction.
• Hockler v. William Powell Company (1st Dept., 2015). The Appellate Division reversed the denial of summary judgment, granted The William Powell Company's motion, and dismissed plaintiff Bryan Hockler's complaint.
• Andrucki v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2015). On remittitur from the Court of Appeals, the First Department affirmed the $2,500,000 judgment for plaintiffs against the Port Authority, which had defaulted by not appearing at trial, without an inquest on damages.
• Berensmann v. Georgia-Pacific (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2014). The appellate court dismissed the claims about Georgia-Pacific's wallboards because it never made asbestos wallboard, but otherwise affirmed the denial of Georgia-Pacific's summary judgment motion, so plaintiffs' joint compound claims proceed.
• Konstantin v. Tishman Liquidating Corp. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2014). The Appellate Division affirmed both jury-verdict judgments for the plaintiffs (Konstantin against Tishman Liquidating Corporation, Dummitt against Crane Co.) and dismissed the appeal from the order denying Crane's post-trial motion as subsumed in the judgment appeal; one justice, joined by another, dissented in part as to Dummitt.
• DiSalvo v. Neles-Jamesbury (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2014). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of summary judgment to Neles-Jamesbury, Inc., holding it had not met its initial burden, so plaintiff Carl DiSalvo prevailed on the appeal.
• Fersch v. Volkswagen Group of America (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2013). The First Department affirmed the trial court's order consolidating the Juni, Fersch and Middleton cases for trial, ruling against Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., which had appealed.
• Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig. (1st Dept., 2013). The First Department reversed the judgment awarding plaintiffs damages against the Port Authority, vacated it, denied plaintiffs' default judgment motion, and granted the Port Authority's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.