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

• Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation v. Baxter Healthcare Corporation (1st Dept., 2013). The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order consolidating the three plaintiffs' cases for trial, rejecting Volkswagen Group of America's challenge to consolidation.
• Bernard v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. (IN the Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (1st Dept., 2012). The First Department affirmed the trial court's order consolidating the three plaintiffs' actions against Colgate-Palmolive for a joint trial, rejecting Colgate-Palmolive's challenge.
• Matter of Kirisits v. Durez Plastics/occidental (3rd Dept., 2012). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision discharging the Special Fund for Reopened Cases from liability, so the employer and its carrier remained liable for the widow's death benefit claim.
• Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig. (1st Dept., 2012). The First Department affirmed the trial court's order consolidating the three plaintiffs' actions against Colgate-Palmolive for a joint trial, rejecting Colgate-Palmolive's appeal.
• US Fid. & Guaranty Co. v. American Re-Ins. Co. (1st Dept., 2012). The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment of about $420 million for USF&G against reinsurers American Re and ECRA (and its pool members), holding they must follow USF&G's loss allocation and that no issue of fact existed on the retention; one justice dissented.
• Penn v. Amchem Products (1st Dept., 2011). The Appellate Division held that the trial court was wrong and that the evidence was enough for the jury to find Kerr Corporation liable to plaintiff Penn. It rejected Kerr's unpreserved challenges, noted the damage awards deviate from reasonable compensation under CPLR 5501(c), and recalled and vacated its May 2010 decision.
• Penn v. Amchem Products (1st Dept., 2010). The Appellate Division held that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find Kerr distributed the asbestos dental liners Penn used, rejecting the trial court's contrary finding in Kerr's favor, and ruled that the damage awards deviated from reasonable compensation.
• Charlop v. AO Smith Water Prods. (1st Dept., 2009). The First Department held that the trial court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting plaintiff Charlop's motion to vacate a stipulation, in an appeal by defendant Kohler Co., and ordered dismissal of the action as to Kohler.
• IN the Matter of Mlodozeniec v. Trio Asbestos Removal Corp. (3rd Dept., 2009). The Appellate Division reversed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision that State Insurance Fund was the liable carrier, holding that Zurich, Trio's insurer on the date of disablement, must pay, and remitted the matter to the Board.
• Continental Casualty Co. v. Employers Ins. Co. of Wausau (1st Dept., 2008). The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's judgment after a nonjury trial and declared for the insurers (Continental Casualty and American Casualty, together CNA) against the defendant class of asbestos claimants: the claims fall within products hazard/completed operations coverage, laches and other defenses apply, coverage is triggered by injury-in-fact, and excess policy RDU 8047261 is exhausted.
• Matter of Anne Lautenschuetz v. AP Greene Industries, Inc. (3rd Dept., 2008). The Appellate Division modified Supreme Court's order, reversing nunc pro tunc approval of all settlements except the April 2007 Amotex Trust settlement, so CNA Insurance largely won and the widow lost on the earlier settlements.
• Held v. AW Chesterton Co. (1st Dept., 2007). The Appellate Division affirmed the ruling in favor of Sequoia Ventures (formerly Bechtel), the respondent engineer, and rejected the plaintiff's claims against it.
• Croteau v. Treadwell Corp. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2007). The Appellate Division affirmed the order granting Con Edison contractual indemnification against Treadwell for sums paid to Croteau, rejecting Treadwell's arguments.
• Held v. Sequoia Ventures (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2007). The Appellate Division affirmed the ruling in favor of Sequoia Ventures (formerly Bechtel), rejecting the plaintiff executrix's claim that the engineer's insulation specifications caused her husband's mesothelioma.
• Barbara Commarata v. Cook, Inc. (3rd Dept., 2005). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision that Merchants Mutual Insurance Company was Azor Drywall's carrier, so the appellants Azor and Merchants lost and the widow's death benefits claim stood.
• IN the Matter of Cammarata v. Caldwell & Cook, Inc. (3rd Dept., 2005). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision that Jack Cammarata's death from mesothelioma was work-related and that Merchants Mutual Insurance Company, Azor Drywall's carrier, was liable, so the claimant won and Azor and Merchants lost.
• Langhorne v. Amchem Prods., Inc. (1st Dept., 2005). The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, holding the plaintiff's claims against the defendants-respondents were barred by releases the decedent signed in settling an earlier federal asbestosis action.
• Holdampf v. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2004). The Appellate Division modified the order, reinstating plaintiffs' negligence claim against the Port Authority, which had won summary judgment below, and remanded for further proceedings; the rest of the order was affirmed.
• Diedrich v. Robert A. Keasbey Co. (IN the Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (1st Dept., 2004). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of summary judgment to Robert A. Keasbey Company, so the executrix's claims go to trial.
• Lustenring v. AC&S, Inc. (1st Dept., 2004). The Appellate Division affirmed the jury verdicts for the plaintiffs against defendant John Crane, Inc., finding the evidence sufficient, no Frye hearing required, and damages not excessive.
• Root v. Eastern Refractories Co., Inc. (4th Dept., 2004). The Appellate Division reversed the order granting summary judgment to Eastern Refractories Co., denied the motion, and reinstated the executor's complaint against Eastern.
• Matter of Conway v. Cbi Services, Inc. (3rd Dept., 2003). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision holding CBI Services and its carrier National Union liable on the widow's death benefits claim, rejecting their due process, evidence and settlement-consent arguments.
• Matter of Drewes v. Steel (3rd Dept., 2003). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision that Lumbermens had an enforceable lien and that the State Insurance Fund forfeited further reimbursement from Lumbermens by not obtaining its consent to the third-party settlements.
• Matter of O'malley v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York (3rd Dept., 2003). The Appellate Division reversed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision disallowing the widow's death benefits claim against Consolidated Edison and remitted the matter to the Board for further proceedings.
• Plumb v. AC and S., Inc. (3rd Dept., 2003). The Appellate Division affirmed the order setting aside the jury's apportionment of 98% of fault to General Electric, a ruling that left Sears, Roebuck, the appellant, responsible for the verdict; two justices concurred and one dissented.
• Chrabas v. Owens-Illinois (Matter of Eighth Judicial District Asbestos Litigation) (4th Dept., 2000). The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's order denying Owens-Illinois's motion to apply Florida law to loss allocation issues and directing that New York law apply, so the plaintiffs prevailed on the choice-of-law question.
• Bille v. Hedman Resources (Matter of Eighth Judicial District Asbestos Litigation v Hedman Resources, Ltd.) (4th Dept., 2000). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of Hedman Resources' motion for summary judgment, leaving plaintiff Bille's mesothelioma action alive, and dismissed the appeal in Action No. 2 upon stipulation.
• Matter of Midland Insurance Company (1st Dept., 2000). The court modified the Supreme Court order: coverage is triggered by inhalation exposure (first or continued) but not by exposure "in residence"; the Highlands $17.5 million reduction was vacated and other "Other Insurance" declarations were changed in part for the Superintendent and in part for LAQ; as modified, affirmed.
• Ronsini v. Worthington Corp. (Matter Of New York City Asbestos Litigation. Elaine Ronsini V. Garlock, Inc.) (1st Dept., 1998). The Appellate Division rejected the challenges by Worthington Corporation and John Crane, Inc. to the jury verdicts for the plaintiffs, and declined to disturb the liability findings, the apportionments or the damages awards as reduced by the trial court.
• Perry v. City of New York (1st Dept., 1998). The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's denial of the widow's motion, ruling she should have been allowed to amend the notice of claim to add a wrongful death cause of action against the City of New York.
• Dollas v. WR Grace & Co. (1st Dept., 1996). The Appellate Division reversed the grants of summary judgment to W.R. Grace against plaintiffs Dollas and Gargano, finding a fact question on whether the decedents were exposed to Grace's Monokote.
• Reid v. Georgia-Pac. Corp. (1st Dept., 1995). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of Rapid-American Corporation's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiff Kenneth Reid's claim against it continues.
• Zalinka v. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp. (3rd Dept., 1995). The appellate court affirmed the judgment entered on the jury verdict for plaintiffs John Zalinka and his wife against Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corporation, which lost its appeal.
• Didner v. Keene Corp. (1st Dept., 1993). The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment requiring Keene Corporation to pay its 15% share of the reduced verdict to plaintiff Marlene Didner, rejecting Keene's argument that it owed nothing after setoffs for the Manville settlement.
• Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig. (1st Dept., 1993). The Appellate Division affirmed the trial court's rulings: it upheld the preclusion of the defendant's relitigation of a point decided in prior litigation, the five additurs, and the exclusion of evidence about the cause of Sutton's death, so the defendant lost.
• Rittenhouse v. St. Regis Hotel Joint Venture (1st Dept., 1992). The Appellate Division left in place the dismissal of Rittenhouse's action on summary judgment for the hotel owners, contractors, architects and liquidator, but reversed and vacated the $10,000 in sanctions the trial court had imposed on her law firm.
• Mendelowitz v. Xerox Corp. (1st Dept., 1991). The Appellate Division modified the Bronx County order on plaintiff's appeal, partly reinstating plaintiff's discovery requests 8 and 9 against Xerox (narrowed) and otherwise affirming the vacatur of request 7.
• Campo v. Asbestospray Corp. (1st Dept., 1990). The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against the respondents (Turner & Newall, PLC, et al.), holding the plaintiffs sought an advisory opinion about serious injuries not yet suffered, and denied class certification as moot.
• Swogger v. Waterman SS Corp. (1st Dept., 1989). The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the asbestos manufacturers' motions to dismiss Sea-Land's third-party contribution claims, holding that admiralty law rather than New York law governs; Sea-Land won and the third-party defendants lost, with one justice dissenting.
• Smith v. Bell Aerospace (3rd Dept., 1987). The Appellate Division reversed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision discharging the Special Funds Conservation Committee from liability on the death claim, and sent the matter back to the Board, with costs against the Special Fund.
• Matter of Smith v. Certain Teed Prods. Corp. (3rd Dept., 1981). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers' Compensation Board's decision disallowing the widow's disability and death claims against Certain Teed Products Corp. as barred by section 40, so the claimant lost.
• Matter of Steinhardt v. Johns-Manville Corp. (4th Dept., 1980). The Appellate Division modified the order and dismissed the complaint, holding the negligence and strict products liability claims time barred, so the defendants (Johns-Manville and others) prevailed over the executrix.
• Weinberg v. Johns-Manville Prods. Corp. (1st Dept., 1979). The majority held that Owens-Corning Fiberglas was entitled to summary judgment, rejecting Special Term's denial of its motion as premature; Owens-Corning won and the plaintiff and Johns-Manville lost. One justice dissented and would have affirmed the denial.
• Matter of LA Gattuta v. Baldwin Ehret-Hill, Inc. (3rd Dept., 1971). The Appellate Division affirmed the Workmen's Compensation Board's award, leaving Consolidated Mutual Insurance Company, the carrier on the risk at the Rochdale site, liable for the death claim, and rejecting the appellants' challenge.