21 Cited authorities

Sommer v. Federal Signal Corp.
79 N.Y.2d 540 (N.Y. 1992) Cited 943 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in New York, "a party may not insulate itself from damages caused by grossly negligent conduct" through an exculpatory clause
P.V. ex Rel. T.V. v. Camp Jaycee
197 N.J. 132 (N.J. 2008) Cited 354 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that the law of the state where the alleged tortfeasor acted and repeatedly performs its tasks must apply if that law is to have any deterrent impact and protect others from harm, "regardless of the home state of the [plaintiffs]."
Schipani v. McLeod
541 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 237 times
Holding that post-judgment interest is mandatory and calculated pursuant to federal statute
Thabault v. Chait
541 F.3d 512 (3d Cir. 2008) Cited 139 times
Concluding that the sole actor exception did not apply in that case because the agents owned only 65% of the principal's stock
In re Brooklyn Navy Yard Asbestos Litigation
971 F.2d 831 (2d Cir. 1992) Cited 209 times
Holding that joint participation pursuant to an agreement — express or implied — to commit a tort is necessary to impose liability on those acting in concert
Whalen v. Kawasaki Motors Corp.
92 N.Y.2d 288 (N.Y. 1998) Cited 131 times
Adopting the "settlement-first" method of reducing the verdict by first reducing the verdict by the amount of the settlement and then applying N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1411 to discount the remainder by the proportion of plaintiff s comparative negligence
Allen v. Great American Reserve Ins. Co.
766 N.E.2d 1157 (Ind. 2002) Cited 118 times
Holding that Indiana choice-of-law rules generally defer to contractual choice-of-law provisions
New York City Asbestos Litig
188 A.D.2d 214 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993) Cited 104 times
Reversing trial court's allocation of bankrupt defendants' shares of liability among both settling and nonsettling defendants and noting that non-settling defendants could seek relief through contribution actions
Ravo v. Rogatnick
70 N.Y.2d 305 (N.Y. 1987) Cited 115 times
Finding joint and several liability appropriate where the evidence established that plaintiff's brain damage was a single indivisible injury and the defendants failed to submit any evidence upon which a finder of fact could base an apportionment of damages
Edwards v. Erie Coach Lines
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 5583 (N.Y. 2011) Cited 41 times
Applying Ontario's loss allocating statute to claims made by Plaintiff against Defendants and New York's loss allocating statute to claims by Defendants/Third-party Plaintiffs against Third-party Defendants
Section 1401 - Claim for contribution
N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1401 Cited 637 times
Noting that the tortfeasor against whom contribution is sought must typically be "subject to liability" to the plaintiff, unless the absence of direct liability is merely the result of a special defense

Crown Cork & Seal Co, et al v. Credit Suisse First, et al

21 Cited authorities

Holding that, in New York, "a party may not insulate itself from damages caused by grossly negligent conduct" through an exculpatory clause

Holding that the law of the state where the alleged tortfeasor acted and repeatedly performs its tasks must apply if that law is to have any deterrent impact and protect others from harm, "regardless of the home state of the [plaintiffs]."

Holding that post-judgment interest is mandatory and calculated pursuant to federal statute

Concluding that the sole actor exception did not apply in that case because the agents owned only 65% of the principal's stock

Holding that joint participation pursuant to an agreement — express or implied — to commit a tort is necessary to impose liability on those acting in concert

Adopting the "settlement-first" method of reducing the verdict by first reducing the verdict by the amount of the settlement and then applying N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1411 to discount the remainder by the proportion of plaintiff s comparative negligence

Holding that Indiana choice-of-law rules generally defer to contractual choice-of-law provisions

Reversing trial court's allocation of bankrupt defendants' shares of liability among both settling and nonsettling defendants and noting that non-settling defendants could seek relief through contribution actions

Finding joint and several liability appropriate where the evidence established that plaintiff's brain damage was a single indivisible injury and the defendants failed to submit any evidence upon which a finder of fact could base an apportionment of damages

Applying Ontario's loss allocating statute to claims made by Plaintiff against Defendants and New York's loss allocating statute to claims by Defendants/Third-party Plaintiffs against Third-party Defendants

Noting that the tortfeasor against whom contribution is sought must typically be "subject to liability" to the plaintiff, unless the absence of direct liability is merely the result of a special defense