Recent Blog Posts
Court Allows Testimony from Expert That Defendants Claim is Based on “Single Fiber” Approach
A recent ruling by a Manhattan judge in the ongoing New York asbestos litigation denied a motion by defendants to bar testimony from an expert whom defendants assert will base her testimony on a “single fiber” or “any exposure” theory of causation. This decision is in contrast to a 2016 decision by another New… Read More »
Appellate Division Holds Pro Rata Liability Applies when there are Gaps in Coverage for a Continuous Long Term Pollution Claim Even if the Gap was Caused by the Unavailability of Insurance in the Marketplace
A recent decision before the First Department (Manhattan) of the New York Appellate Division has found that, in a case of environmental property damage occurring over the course of decades, the insured, rather than the insurer, is responsible for losses occurring during gaps in coverage even if the insured was unable to obtain insurance… Read More »
Federal Court Finds Three-Hour Exposure to Asbestos-Containing Product Fails to Establish Basis for Personal Injury Lawsuit
A federal court in New York’s Southern District has recently ruled that a plaintiff who could recall only a single three-hour incident of exposure to a defendant manufacturer’s product that may have contained asbestos was not sufficient to support causation of mesothelioma in a claim for damages against that manufacturer. The recently-decided case, Holzworth… Read More »
Failure to Disclose Environmental Cleanup held Fraudulent in As-Is Sale
A recent case caused the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court to consider whether a seller could be sued for failing to disclose an environmental cleanup on the property at issue, even where the property was sold as-is, and the fraud claim was brought over a decade after the purchase. The case,… Read More »
Third Parties May Have Greater Duty to Warn after Recent Case
Manufacturers have long understood that they have a duty under the law to warn customers and consumers that their products carry risk of injury or illness, if such a risk is known. Even where the risk is carried not by something the manufacturer has made, but by a component integrated into their product that… Read More »
Update to Toxic Substances Control Act Will Change How the EPA Regulates Chemicals
After forty years without an update, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) has recently been updated by Congress. The amended laws, passed under the Frank Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, will vastly expand the powers of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate chemical production in the US. The list of… Read More »
Court of Appeals Reaffirms Storm in Progress Doctrine
In a recent opinion issued by New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals reaffirmed that property owners will not be held liable for slip-and-fall injuries that occur during a storm. The court affirmed the Appellate Division’s decision denying damages for injuries received during an ice storm in Newburgh. In Sherman v. New York… Read More »
Law Offices of Richard A. Fogel Succeeds on Defense of Breach of Warranty Claim
Limited warranties are designed to protect customers from losing money on obviously-defective products, ensuring that they are able to recuperate the costs of repairing or replacing an item that never served its intended purpose. However, as is indicated by the name, limited warranties are not intended to offer a refund to the customer under… Read More »
Recent Victory in New York Supreme Court on Battle over Inherited Property
The Law Offices of Richard A. Fogel recently scored a victory for the fifty percent heir of a parcel of property in Nassau County who was in a stalemate with his fellow fifty percent heir, his sister. The property will now be partitioned and sold by a referee appointed by the Supreme Court. The… Read More »
Experts Barred from Testifying at Trial By Court of Appeals in Toxic Tort Case
In a recent gasoline vapor toxic tort decision from the Court of Appeals, New York State’s highest court, two experts were barred from testifying at trial when they didn’t rely on generally accepted principles and methodologies in forming their expert opinions as mandated under New York law which follows Frye v. United States, 293… Read More »
