In re New York Asbestos Litigation
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
Plaintiffs in thirteen separate asbestos tort actions before this court have moved against eighty-eight defendants and third party defendants pursuant to Rule 42(a), F.R.Civ.P., to consolidate their actions.1 *646For the reasons set forth below, the motion is granted in part and denied in part. Prior Proceedings
These actions are thirteen of the so-called “asbestos cases” that have been supervised by the Multi-District Litigation (MDL) Panel for discovery and pre-trial purposes. All of these actions were originally filed in the Southern District of New York. Eight of…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Martin v. WilksSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- John E. Johnson and H/w Ann Marie Johnson v. The Celotex Corporation, Owens-Illinois, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- Johnson v. Manhattan Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
- In Re "Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation Mdl No. 381Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
- Wanda Jenkins v. Raymark Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1986
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Vives Vázquez v. Estado Libre AsociadoSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1996
- Consorti v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Malcolm v. National Gypsum Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- ACandS, Inc. v. GodwinCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
- In Re New York Asbestos LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1994
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.