§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation.--------------------------------Doris Kay Dummitt,, Respondent,v.A.W. Chesterton, et al., Defendants, Crane Co., Appellant.

Brief

17 Cited authorities

  1. Liriano v. Hobart Corp.

    92 N.Y.2d 232 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 476 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that no duty to warn exists when hazards are known through "general knowledge"

  2. Rastelli v. Goodyear Tire Co.

    79 N.Y.2d 289 (N.Y. 1992)   Cited 235 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding there is no duty to warn about another manufacturer's product when defendant manufactured only sound products and had "no control over the production" of the defective products at issue in the case

  3. Cover v. Cohen

    61 N.Y.2d 261 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 283 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that liability in a design-defect case requires a balancing of “the product's risks against its utility and costs and against the risks, utility and cost of the alternatives”

  4. Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corp.

    493 F.2d 1076 (5th Cir. 1973)   Cited 384 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Borel, for example, the Fifth Circuit (applying Texas law) held that it was enough for a victim of mesothelioma and asbestosis to show that he was tortiously "exposed to the [asbestos-contaminated] products of all the defendants on many occasions."

  5. Campagnola v. Mulholland

    76 N.Y.2d 38 (N.Y. 1990)   Cited 206 times
    Holding that in the context of a contingency fee agreement for one third of the client's recovery, "[w]here [an attorney's] discharge is without cause, the attorney is limited to recovering in quantum meruit the reasonable value of the services rendered"

  6. Waters v. New York City Housing Authority

    69 N.Y.2d 225 (N.Y. 1987)   Cited 201 times
    Holding that owner of housing project who failed to keep building's door locks in good repair did not owe duty to passerby to protect her from being dragged off the street into the building and assaulted, because imposing such duty would do little to minimize crime, and the social benefits to be gained did "not warrant the extension of the landowner's duty to maintain secure premises to the millions of individuals who use the sidewalks of New York City each day and are thereby exposed to the dangers of street crime."

  7. Wake v. U.S.

    89 F.3d 53 (2d Cir. 1996)   Cited 75 times
    Holding that the Feres doctrine barred claims by a student ROTC member against the United States and various military personnel

  8. George v. Celotex Corp.

    914 F.2d 26 (2d Cir. 1990)   Cited 86 times
    Determining that asbestos report was relevant to defendant's liability because of defendant's duty to know and because of defendant's use of precise value criticized by report

  9. Lancaster Co v. Propane Gas

    75 A.D.2d 55 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)   Cited 114 times
    Holding that the trial court erred when it refused to provide a jury instruction regarding whether the propane distributor had a duty to warn

  10. Milau Associates, Inc. v. North Avenue Development Corp.

    42 N.Y.2d 482 (N.Y. 1977)   Cited 120 times
    Holding that “reasonable care and competence owed generally by practitioners in the particular trade or profession defines the limits of an injured party's justifiable demands” in tort for negligent provision of services

  11. Section 500.1 - General requirements

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.1   Cited 1 times

    (a) All papers shall comply with applicable statutes and rules, particularly the signing requirement of section 130-1.1 -a of this Title. (b) Papers filed. Papers filed means briefs, papers submitted pursuant to sections 500.10 and 500.11 of this Part, motion papers, records and appendices. (c) Method of reproduction. All papers filed may be reproduced by any method that produces a permanent, legible, black image on white paper. Reproduction on both sides of the paper is encouraged. (d) Designation