LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

MALTESE v WESTINGHOUSE ELEC. CORP. (MATTER OF NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CourtCode: AP, CourtName: NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS, Plaintiff: MALTESE, State: NEW YORK, UniqueCaseRef: NE>AP>089_0955, Westinghouse, Appellate, Reckless Disregard, Maltese, Stallone, Punitive Damages, Safety, Judge, York City, Asbestos, Respondent, Memorandum, Appellate Division, Jury, Trial Court, Workers, Evidence, Standard, Insofar, Costs, Edison, Powerhouses, Hudson Avenue, Exposure, Injuries, Ny2d, Requiring, Risk , ContentID: 120251379

Case Documents
1 1997-02-11 OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 125288
2 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 2 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
APPELLATE
RECKLESS DISREGARD
MALTESE
STALLONE
PUNITIVE DAMAGES
SAFETY
JUDGE
YORK CITY
ASBESTOS
RESPONDENT
MEMORANDUM
APPELLATE DIVISION
PLAINTIFFS
JURY
TRIAL COURT
WORKERS
EVIDENCE
STANDARD
INSOFAR
COSTS
EDISON
POWERHOUSES
HUDSON AVENUE
EXPOSURE
DEFENDANT
INJURIES
NY2D
REQUIRING
RISK


  IN THE MATTER OF NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION

  AMELIA MALTESE , APPELLANT, v. WESTINGHOUSE ELEC. CORP., RESPONDENT.

  SAVINO STALLONE, ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. WESTINGHOUSE ELEC. CORP., RESPONDENT

    89 N.Y.2d 955, 678 N.E.2d 467, 655 N.Y.S.2d 855 (1997).
    February 11, 1997

   1 No. 16 (1997 NY Int. 12)
   Decided February 11, 1997
     _________________________________________________________________

   This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
   publication in the New York Reports.
   Christopher M. Placitella, for Appellants.
   David Boies, for Respondent.

   MEMORANDUM:

   The order of the Appellate Division insofar as appealed from should be
   affirmed, with costs.

   Mario Maltese and Savino Stallone were mechanics at Consolidated
   Edison Company's New York City powerhouses. Maltese worked at Con
   Edison's Hudson Avenue and Astoria powerhouses from 1951 through 1985.
   Stallone worked at the Hudson Avenue facility from 1946 until 1981.
   Both men contracted mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer, as a result
   of their exposure to, among other things, the dust generated by
   maintenance and repair of asbestos-insulated turbines that defendant
   Westinghouse Corporation had sold to Con Edison.

   Plaintiff-appellants (Maltese's estate, Stallone and his wife) brought
   suit in Supreme Court seeking damages for their injuries from multiple
   defendants, including Westinghouse. The case was consolidated with
   several others, the jury finding Westinghouse 20% liable for
   plaintiffs' injuries. The jury further found that Westinghouse
   demonstrated reckless disregard for the safety of Maltese and
   Stallone--making the corporation jointly liable for plaintiffs'
   noneconomic damages (see, CPLR 1602(7))--and that an award of punitive
   damages against Westinghouse was appropriate. On Westinghouse's
   post-trial motion, the trial court set aside those portions of the
   verdict finding reckless disregard for the workers' safety and
   assessing punitive damages. Judgment was thereafter entered, and the
   Appellate Division affirmed.

SNIPPETS:
  • CORP., RESPONDENT.
  • SAVINO STALLONE, ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. WESTINGHOUSE ELEC.
  • This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
  • The order of the Appellate Division insofar as appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.
  • Mario Maltese and Savino Stallone were mechanics at Consolidated Edison Company's New York
  • Maltese worked at Con Edison's Hudson Avenue and Astoria powerhouses from 1951 through 1985.
  • Both men contracted mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer, as a result of their exposure to,
  • Plaintiff-appellants brought suit in Supreme Court seeking damages for their injuries from
  • The jury further found that Westinghouse demonstrated reckless disregard for the safety of
  • the trial court set aside those portions of the verdict finding reckless disregard for the
  • We agree with the trial court and Appellate Division as to the finding of reckless disregard,
  • We adopted a gross negligence standard, requiring that "'the actor has intentionally done an
  • At most, the evidence reveals Westinghouse's general awareness that exposure to high
  • Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur.
  •    |