Legal Opinion
New York City Asbestos Litigation v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 19, 1996PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
*415The trial court properly set aside the verdict finding intentional acting in concert (see, CPLR 1602 [11]). There was no evidence of a concerted effort to suppress information about asbestos injury or to deceive or mislead asbestos victims (cf., City of New York v Lead Indus. Assn., 190 AD2d 173, 177-178). Plaintiffs did not demonstrate there was a common design or plan to commit a tortious act, or that any act in furtherance of such an agreed purpose was committed (see, Rastelli v Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 79 NY2d 289, 295). No fair view of the evidence supports the conclusion that…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Rastelli v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1992
- Chainani v. Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- Martin v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- In re New York City Asbestos LitigationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Dafler v. Raymark Industries, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1992
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- DRABCZYK, STEPHEN v. FISHER CONTROLS INTERNATIONAL, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012