Legal Opinion
In re New York City Asbestos Litigation
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 29, 1997PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Edward H. Lehner, J.
In the five cases consolidated for trial, two juries were asked *123to deal with injuries that resulted from exposure to asbestos that occurred, in some cases, over a half century ago. Regrettably, it appears that our legal system has to date been unable (although not through the absence of effort) to resolve the liability aspect of asbestos-related claims except through lengthy individual trials.
These five cases were tried through reverse bifurcation. On the damage aspect, the jury rendered a verdict awarding the following amounts for pain and suffering…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Lolik v. Big v. Supermarkets, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1995
- Grassi v. UlrichNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.New York Court of Appeals · 1997
- State University Construction Fund v. Kipphut & Neuman Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Lincoln Industrial Enterprises, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- In Re Joint Eastern and Southern Dist. AsbestosDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
- In Re Asbestos LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1997
- Consorti v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1998
- In re New York City Asbestos LitigationNew York Supreme Court · 1998
- D'Ulisse v. Amchen Products, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 2007