Governor’s signature) would amend the whistleblower provisions of the NPCL to prohibit an employee who also holds a position as a director from participating in any board or committee deliberations concerning whistleblower policies and prohibit any person who is the subject of a whistleblower complaint from being present at or participating in board or committee deliberations or voting on the matter relating to the complaint and to repeal NPCL § 712-a(c), which requires the board or an audit committee, comprised exclusively of independent directors, to oversee and implement the conflict of interest and whistleblower policies. None of these proposed changes address a private cause of action. Under N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 5701 an order denying a defendant’s pretrial motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint is immediately appealable as of right within 30 days from service of notice of entry of the judgment. Poly Prep may also choose to appeal until the Supreme Court enters final judgment. N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 5501(a)(1). Plaintiff also filed claims for breach of contract and libel that the Court dismissed. Memo. of Law in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Verified Second Amended Complaint at 8, Della Pietra v. Poly Prep Country Day Sch., Index No. 506586/2015 (Sup. Ct. Kings. Cnty. Nov. 5, 2016) (Baily-Schiffman, J.), NYSCEF No. 76.

ially from what would be reasonable compensation. The Justice vacated the award and ordered a new trial on the issue of damages unless plaintiff agreed to reduce the awards to $4.5 million for past pain and suffering and $3.5 million for future pain and suffering.The plaintiff alleged exposure to asbestos while working as a carpenter from 1975 to 1977 and that, as a result of the exposure, he developed mesothelioma of the tunica vaginalis (a form of testicular cancer). The jury found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded him $7 million for past pain and suffering, $12 million for future pain and suffering, $64,832 for past lost wages and $485,325 for future lost wages. The jury apportioned 76 percent of the fault to Tishman Liquidating Corporation, who then moved for an order setting aside the verdict.The court noted that considerable deference should be given to a jury’s finding but that an award may be set aside “if it deviates materially from what would be reasonable compensation.” N.Y. CPLR 5501(c). The court then did a thorough analysis of the plaintiff’s damages compared to those awarded in several recent New York County asbestos trials. The highest recent award occurred in In re New York City Asbestos Litiqation (D’Ylisse), 16 Misc.3d 945 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Co. 2007) where the jury awarded a total of $20 million dollars. D’Ulisse involved similar treatments to those undergone by the plaintiff but to a much greater extent, including multiple surgeries, complications related to chemotherapy, and intense pain.Following the analysis, the court concluded that based on the nature, extent and duration of the plaintiff’s injuries, the awards of $7 million for past pain and suffering and $12 million for future pain and suffering deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation.New York County generally sees the highest asbestos verdicts in the state, which tends to drive verdicts up throughout the country. Asbestos defendants nationwide hope that the decision signals a changi