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

• Erickson v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2015). The court denied the motions of CBS Corporation (Westinghouse) and General Electric for summary judgment based on Montana's statute of repose, so the plaintiffs' claims against both defendants continue.
• Gonzales v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2015). The court denied Crane Co.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all claims and cross-claims against it, finding fact issues for trial.
• Koulermos v. Treadwell Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2015). The court denied Treadwell Corporation's summary judgment motion to the extent it sought dismissal of co-defendant National Grid's cross-claims, and held the motion moot as to the plaintiffs' own claims, which they had withdrawn opposition to.
• Hernandez-Vega v. Fisher Controls Int'l (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (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) (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) (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) (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) (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) (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) (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) (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) (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) (2015). The trial court denied Crane Co.'s motion for summary judgment, so plaintiff Annie Smyth's claims against Crane continue toward a jury.
• Assenzio v. Burnham (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2015). The court denied Burnham's and Cleaver-Brooks' motions to set aside the five mesothelioma verdicts for the plaintiffs, but found every damages award excessive and ordered new damages trials unless each plaintiff accepts a reduced award.
• Hackshaw v. Crane Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2015). The court denied Crane Co.'s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and set aside the verdict only to order new trials on damages for Hackshaw's past and Sweberg's future pain and suffering unless the plaintiffs accept reductions to $6 million and $5 million.
• Matter of Crist v. Amchem Prods., Inc. (Erie, 2015). The court granted Fisher Scientific's and VWR International's motions and dismissed the Crists' New York action on forum non conveniens grounds, on condition that defendants accept service of a new Michigan complaint and waive jurisdiction and limitations defenses.
• Voelker v. John Crane (Matter of Eighth Jud. Dist. Asbestos Litig.) (Erie, 2015). The court granted plaintiff Janet Voelker's motion, vacating the $250,000 pain and suffering award and ordering a new trial on that item unless defendants stipulate to $600,000, and denied John Crane's cross-motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Quinlan v. Marine Transport Lines (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2015). The court granted Marine Transport Lines' motion to dismiss as time-barred, refusing equitable tolling, and severed Marine and dismissed the complaint against it; the Quinlan estate plaintiffs lost.
• Galasso v. BF Goodrich (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2015). The trial court denied BF Goodrich's motion for summary judgment dismissing the Galassos' complaint and all claims and cross-claims against it, so plaintiffs prevailed on the motion.
• Best v. The William Powell Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2015). The court denied the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate the Best/Nefsey and Rocovich/Weil asbestos cases for joint trial, so the opposing defendants prevailed.
• Scainetti v. BW/IP (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2015). The trial court denied BW/IP's motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of plaintiff Jack Scainetti's claims, so the claims against BW/IP go forward.
• Juni v. Ford Motor Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2015). The court granted Ford Motor Company's post-trial motion, set aside the jury verdict for plaintiffs Arthur and Mary Juni in its entirety, and directed judgment for Ford.
• Lefrak v. American Biltrite (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.) (2015). The court denied defendant American Biltrite's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiff Richard Lefrak's claims against it continue.
• Moore v. AERCO Int'l (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2015). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate nine asbestos actions into three groups for joint trial, over the defendants' objections.
• North v. Adam Opel AG. (Albany, 2015). The court granted German automaker Adam Opel AG's motion to dismiss the complaint of Larry and Claudia North for lack of personal jurisdiction, denying the plaintiffs' request for further jurisdictional discovery.
• Pendolino v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2015). The trial court granted Nash Engineering Company's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the plaintiffs' claims and all cross-claims against Nash, because plaintiffs did not show exposure to asbestos from a Nash pump; the case continued against the other defendants.
• Smith v. AO Smith Water Prods. (2015). The court treated Cleaver-Brooks' summary judgment motion as a motion to renew and denied it, finding a triable issue of fact on whether plaintiff Ernest Smith's disassembly of its boilers was a reasonably foreseeable use.
• Storey v. AO Smith Water Products Co. (2015). The court denied defendant Goodrich Corporation's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiff John Storey's claim against Goodrich continues.
• Vellucci v. Borg-Warner Corp. (2015). The court denied Hennessey Industries' (successor to Ammco Tools) motion for summary judgment, leaving plaintiff Linda Vellucci's claims against it for trial.
• Adler v. 3M Co. (2014). The court denied Gardner Denver's motion for summary judgment, finding a triable issue of fact on whether Mr. Adler was exposed to asbestos from Gardner Denver air compressors, so plaintiffs John and Elaine Adler prevailed on the motion.
• Armanious v. 3M Co. (2014). The court denied Union Carbide Corporation's motion for summary judgment, so the plaintiff estate's claims against it continue, because a jury could infer that Mr. Nilsson was exposed to its Calidria asbestos through National Gypsum's Gold Bond joint compound.
• Bailen v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2014). The court denied Philips Electronics North American Corporation's (Magnavox) motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs Eddie Bailen and Rena Bailen's claims against it continue.
• Baruch v. Baxter Healthcare Corp. (2014). The court denied Baxter Healthcare Corporation's motion for summary judgment in its entirety, so plaintiffs Ester and Nerye Baruch's claims against it continued.
• Brown v. Bell & Gossett Co. (2014). The court granted Con Edison's motion to set aside the jury verdict against it, vacated the judgment for the plaintiffs (Brown's estate and his wife), and dismissed the complaint against Con Edison.
• Burawa v. Acker Drill Co. (2014). The trial court denied Electrolux Home Products' motion for summary judgment, leaving plaintiffs' claims over Hercules engine blocks to proceed.
• Citron v. AO Smith Water Prods. (2014). The court denied Trane U.S., Inc. (formerly American Standard) summary judgment, so the plaintiffs, the Citron family and estate, kept their claims against it.
• Correnti v. Bertram D. Stone, Inc. (2014). The court denied Hollingsworth & Vose's motion for partial summary judgment dismissing plaintiff Correnti's fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims, finding the pleading adequate and triable issues on whether H&V was Lorillard's joint venturer.
• Dorfman v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2014). The trial court denied defendant United Conveyor Corporation's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs (the estate and widow of Linton Dorfman) kept their claims against it.
• Friedman v. AO Smith Wter Prod. Co. (2014). The court denied defendant Appleton Electric LLC's motion for summary judgment, finding a triable issue whether Appleton's fiber fillers contained asbestos, so plaintiffs Stanley and Phyllis Friedman prevailed on the motion.
• Golden v. Alliance Laundry Sys. (2014). The court granted plaintiff Marvin Golden's motion to vacate the Special Master's recommendation, rejected the defendants' forum objection, and directed that the case be placed on the October 2013 In-Extremis docket.
• Hammer v. Algoma Hardwoods, Inc. (2014). The trial court denied defendant Mario & DiBono Plastering Co.'s motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs' claims against it continue.
• Herman v. Abex Corp. (2014). The trial court denied Carlisle's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs Elizabeth and Fred Herman won on the motion and the claims against Carlisle continue.
• Horvath v. Acf Indus., LLC (2014). The court denied defendant CSX Transportation's motion to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds, so the plaintiffs' case stays in New York County.
• Houston v. AO Smith Corp. (2014). The court granted general contractor Morse Diesel's motion for summary judgment and dismissed all claims and cross-claims against it; the action continued against the remaining defendants.
• Houston v. Beazer E., Inc. (2014). The court granted Glenwood Mason Supply Co., Inc.'s motion for summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiffs' claims and cross-claims against it because it was not the successor to Glenwood Mason Supply Co.; the case continues against the other defendants.
• Houston v. Beazer E., Inc. (2014). The court granted general contractor Tishman Liquidating Corporation's summary judgment motion, dismissing plaintiffs Thomas and Ellen Houston's claims and all cross-claims against it, while the case continued against the other defendants.
• Hockler v. The William Powell Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2014). The court denied The William Powell Company's motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff Bryan Hockler's complaint and all cross-claims, so the plaintiff's failure-to-warn claim goes forward.
• Abrams v. Foster Wheeler (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2014). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion in part, consolidating the Bova, Futia, Gay and McGinnity actions for a joint trial and ordering the Obremski and Abrams actions tried separately.
• In re New York City Asbestos Litigation v. Certainteed Corp. (2014). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate 17 asbestos actions into groups for joint trial, except that it split the proposed Group 1 into two groups (1(a) and 1(b)); the defendants' prejudice objections were rejected.
• Juni v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2014). The court denied defendant Dana Companies, LLC's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiffs Arthur and Mary Juni kept their claims against Dana.