Legal Opinion

Consorti v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided June 15, 1998No. 92 Civ. 6377(RWS)PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SWEET, District Judge.

After twenty-five days of trial, the jury awarded plaintiff John Consorti (“Consorti”) $12 million for pain and suffering. Defendant Owens Corning Fiberglas Corporation (“OCF”) now moves for a new trial or a remittitur reducing Consorti’s pain and suffering to an amount no greater than $3.5 million. Although the motion for a new trial or, in the alternative, a remittitur had been previously denied, revisitation of the issue in light of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc., 518 U.S. 415, 116 S.Ct. 2211, 135 L.Ed.2d…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
  2. McDougald v. GarberNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
  3. Consorti v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
  4. Senko v. FondaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
  5. Consorti v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Katt v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2001
  2. In Re Joint Eastern and Southern Dist. AsbestosDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
  3. Hamilton v. Garlock, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API