Legal Opinion
Salerno v. Garlock Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 23, 1995PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered August 4, 1994, which denied defendant Rapid-American Corporation’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Issues of fact exist that preclude summary judgment, including whether plaintiff was exposed to asbestos products manu*464factured by defendant’s predecessor (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). In drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the party against whom summary judgment is sought, a reasonable trier of fact could find that plaintiff worked in the vicinity…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Zuckerman v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Dielv. Flintkote Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Cawein v. Flintkote Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
3Cited by9 opinions
- Berkowitz v. A.C. & S., Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Comeau v. W.R. Grace & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Lloyd v. W.R. Grace & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Ronsini v. Garlock, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.