New York Asbestos Case Law

Asbestos decisions from New York's courts and the federal courts there: 711 cases in our library so far. For what the law requires today, see New York asbestos laws; for where exposure happened, see New York asbestos exposure sites.

State trial courts

New York Supreme Court

• Kestenbaum v. Durez Corp. (2014). The court denied Union Carbide Corporation's motion for summary judgment, leaving the plaintiff's claims against it in place.
• Konstantin v. 640 Third Ave. Assoc. (2014). The court denied defendant Tishman Liquidating Corporation's post-judgment motion to reopen discovery into plaintiff's claims against asbestos bankruptcy trusts, so the plaintiff estate kept the verdict as entered.
• Konstantin v. 640 Third Ave. Assoc. (2014). The court denied defendant Tishman Liquidating Corporation's post-judgment motion to reopen discovery about plaintiff's claims to asbestos bankruptcy trusts, so plaintiff, the executrix of David Konstantin's estate, prevailed.
• Lamberty v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2014). The court denied Cleaver-Brooks, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment, so the plaintiffs' claims against it continue.
• Langhorne v. Aerofin Corp. (2014). The court denied Atlas Turner, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment, holding that it waived its personal jurisdiction defense and that plaintiffs raised a triable issue on exposure to its Newtherm insulation; plaintiffs prevailed.
• Scainetti v. The Fairbanks Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2014). The court denied The Fairbanks Company's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs' claims against Fairbanks continue.
• Feuerman v. A.O. Smith Water Prods. Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2014). The court granted plaintiffs' motion for joint trials in part, ordering the four mesothelioma cases tried together, the three lung cancer cases tried together separately, and the Bova case tried individually.
• Carmody v. DAP (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2014). The court partly granted plaintiffs' motion to quash defendant DAP's subpoena to the Manville Trust, ordering the Trust to produce documents to the court for in camera review, and otherwise denied the motion, so DAP largely prevailed.
• Lamberty v. Cleaver Brooks (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2014). The court denied defendant Cleaver Brooks's request to adjourn the joint trial and also denied plaintiffs' cross-motion to strike Cleaver Brooks's 18th affirmative defense and to preclude its expert witnesses, because both sides had missed discovery deadlines.
• McCloskey v. AO Smith Water Prods. (2014). The court denied Mario & DiBono's motion to set aside the verdict on causation, recklessness, apportionment, pain and suffering and consolidation, but ordered a new trial on loss of consortium damages unless plaintiffs accept a reduction of that award from $2 million to $340,000.
• McKim v. AO Smith Water Prod. Co. (2014). The court granted the boiler defendants' forum non conveniens motion on condition that all defendants waive jurisdictional and limitations defenses in another forum, staying the action and later dismissing it, against the McKim plaintiffs.
• Noble v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2014). The trial court denied Lennox Industries' motion for summary judgment, so plaintiff Harriet Noble's claims against Lennox continue.
• Norton v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2014). The trial court granted O'Connor Constructors' motion for summary judgment and dismissed the plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims against it, while the case continued against the other defendants.
• Proctor v. Alcoa, Inc. (2014). The trial court denied Duro Dyne Corporation's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs James and Joy Proctor's claims against Duro Dyne go forward.
• Proctor v. Alcoa, Inc. (2014). The court denied defendant Andal Corporation's motion for summary judgment, finding triable issues of fact on whether Andal, as successor to Star Circle and Circle Floors, was responsible for plaintiff James Proctor's asbestos exposure at the World Trade Center.
• Proctor v. Alcoa, Inc. (2014). The court denied Momentive Specialty Chemicals (sued as Borden Chemical) summary judgment, because plaintiff James Proctor's deposition testimony raised a fact issue about exposure to asbestos from Borden's Duro-Dyne duct sealer.
• Shtockhammer v. 29th Street Hotel Acquisition, LLC (2014). The court denied the motion to dismiss by the current property owner (Acquisition) and, without prejudice to renewal after discovery, by Mezz, Hotel and JCMC, but granted it for Chetrit Group, which had never held any interest, so plaintiff Shtockhammer's claims continued against the others.
• Smith v. 3M Company (2014). The court denied Con Ed's motion for summary judgment, leaving plaintiffs' claims and the cross-claims against Con Ed in place, because a triable issue existed on whether Con Ed could have prevented Mr. Smith's injuries.
• Vantosh v. 3M Co. (2014). The court vacated the Special Master's recommendation, ordered Dow Corning to answer plaintiffs' standard interrogatories and produce a corporate witness, and denied Dow Corning's summary judgment motion without prejudice to renewal after discovery, so plaintiffs won.
• Wiacek v. 3M Co. (2014). The court granted North Safety Products' summary judgment motion on the breach of warranty and design defect claims and denied it on the failure to warn claim and the pleading-sufficiency challenge, so the failure to warn claim goes forward.
• Zimmerman v. AO Smith Water Prods. (2014). The court denied Rheem Manufacturing Company's motion for summary judgment, so the estate's claims against Rheem go forward.
• Adler v. 3M Co. (2013). The court denied both the plaintiffs' motion and Volkswagen's motion and confirmed the Special Master's recommendation, so Volkswagen may depose the plaintiff's pathologist in Milan and must pay the reasonable travel expenses of one of the plaintiffs' lawyers.
• Assenzio v. AO Smith Water Prods. (2013). The court granted plaintiffs' motion in part, consolidating 15 asbestos cases into three joint trial groups and ordering the Liberman and Vara cases tried separately, over the defendants' objections.
• Bailen v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2013). The court denied Union Pacific Railroad Company's motion to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds, so plaintiffs Eddie Bailen and Rena Ash-Bailen keep their case in New York.
• Baiocco v. AC & S., Inc. (2013). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate in part, ordering three joint trials (Byrnes, Cayen and Latzer; Dell'Arciprete and Kornacki; Baiocco and Blank) and ordering the Balducci case tried separately.
• Barawa v. Acker Drill Co. (2013). The court denied Ford Motor Company's motion for summary judgment except for the unopposed loss of consortium claim, which was dismissed; plaintiffs largely prevailed.
• Barton v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2013). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion in part, ordering three joint trials: the three lung cancer plaintiffs together, four mesothelioma plaintiffs together, and the three shipyard or Army mesothelioma plaintiffs together.
• Baruch v. Baxter Healthcare Corp. (2013). The court denied Fisher Scientific Company's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs Ester and Nerye Baruch's claims against Fisher continue.
• Berensmann v. 3M Co. (2013). The court denied defendant Georgia-Pacific's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs William and Madelyn Berensmann's claims against it continue.
• Brown v. Bell & Gosset Co. (2013). The court granted LILCO (National Grid Generation) summary judgment dismissing the unopposed Labor Law § 241(6) claim but denied it as to the Labor Law § 200 claim, so plaintiffs Harry and Phyllis Brown's § 200 claim continues.
• Brown v. Bell & Gossett Co. (2013). The court granted Con Edison summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 241(6) claim (unopposed) but denied it on the Labor Law § 200 and common-law claims, so those claims by Harry and Phyllis Brown go forward.
• Cisler v. AO Smith Water Products Co. (2013). The trial court granted Union Carbide Corporation's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims against it, while the case continued against the other defendants.
• Crane v. Crane Co. (2013). On reargument, the court granted LILCO's summary judgment motion only as to the Labor Law § 241(6) claim, which was dismissed as unopposed, and otherwise denied it, so the Labor Law § 200 and common law claims by the Cranes against LILCO continue.
• Feinstein v. Armstrong Intl., Inc. (2013). The court denied Ingersoll Rand Company's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs' claims against Ingersoll continue.
• Finerty v. Abex Corp. (2013). The court found plaintiffs made a sufficient start to warrant jurisdictional discovery, referred it to the Special Master, marked Ford Ireland's and Ford England's motions to dismiss off the calendar with leave to reinstate, and denied the motions to stay discovery as moot.
• Fischer v. Aerco Intl., Inc. (2013). The trial court granted defendant Nash Engineering Company's summary judgment motion and dismissed the plaintiffs' claims and all cross-claims against Nash, while the action continued against the remaining defendants.
• Frieder v. Long Is. RR (2013). The court denied the Long Island Railroad and Metropolitan Transportation Authority's motion for summary judgment, finding the LIRR owed Mr. Frieder a duty of care and that fact questions remained on exposure, so the plaintiffs prevailed on the motion.
• Friedman v. AO Smith Corp. (2013). The court granted Graybar Electric Co.'s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the action and cross-claims against it, while the case continued against the remaining defendants.
• Garbutt v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2013). The court denied Lennox Industries' motion for summary judgment, leaving plaintiffs' claims against Lennox to go forward.
• Griffin v. AP Servs., Inc. (2013). The trial court denied defendant William Powell Company's motion for summary judgment, finding plaintiff Robert Griffin raised a triable issue about exposure to asbestos from Powell valves aboard the USS Eberle.
• Hammer v. Algoma (2013). The court denied Bird Incorporated's motion for summary judgment, leaving the Hammers' claims against Bird for trial.
• Juni v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2013). The court denied defendant Lipe Automation Corporation's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs Arthur and Mary Juni's claims against Lipe continue.
• Kelly v. Airco Welders Supply (2013). The court denied Milwaukee Valve Company's motion for summary judgment, so the plaintiff's claims against it continue.
• Liberman v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2013). The court granted Union Carbide Corporation's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint and cross claims against it, because plaintiffs did not show Mr. Liberman was exposed to UCC's asbestos; the case continued against the other defendants.
• Lindsay v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2013). The court denied Leviton Manufacturing Co.'s motion for summary judgment, finding material fact issues on whether plaintiff William Lindsay was exposed to asbestos from Leviton light fixtures and outlets, so the plaintiffs' case against Leviton goes to a jury.
• Lindsay v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2013). The court denied defendant Kohler Co.'s motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs William and Patricia Lindsay's claims against Kohler continue.
• Logan v. AP Miller-Maersk, Inc. (2013). The court denied Cemex's motion for summary judgment dismissing all claims and cross-claims against it, because the missing agreements left questions of fact and plaintiffs raised a triable issue of de facto merger with Seas Shipping.
• Logan v. AP Moller-Maersk, Inc. (2013). The court denied defendant Blackmer Pump Company's motion for summary judgment, finding Blackmer failed to make a prima facie showing, so plaintiffs John and Gail Logan's claims against it continued.
• Logan v. AP Moller-Maersk, Inc. (2013). The court denied Union Carbide's cross-motion for summary judgment in its entirety, so plaintiffs John and Gail Logan prevailed, and denied Georgia Pacific's motion as moot because plaintiffs had settled with it.
• Lowe v. Aerco Intl., Inc. (2013). The trial court denied Crane Co.'s motion for summary judgment in its entirety, so plaintiffs' claims against Crane proceed.