Money Awarded in Asbestos Lawsuit is Upheld by Court

New Asbestos Trial Ordered is Denied and Money Awarded in Lawsuit Stands

While knowledge of prior Court affirmances of jury verdicts is useful, so is the verdicts of juries in similar situations, who as a group, should most accurately reflect the collective wisdom of the community.

Accordingly, their verdict, absent the acts of a runaway jury, should be given great deference (Santalucia v County of Broome, 228 AD2d 895, 644 NYS2d 408 [3d Dept 1996]; Matter of Nickel RR, 188 Misc 2d 742, 729 NYS2d 575 especially where the losses are of such an intangible nature as pain and suffering (Reed v City of New York, 304 AD2d 1, 7, 757 NYS2d 244, 248-49 [1st Dept 2003]).

In their submissions, both sides have failed to compare the awards of the cases they cite with the degree and length of the suffering of both defendants.

Given that failure, the Court in evaluating the length and degree of suffering, the evidence of Mr. D'Ulisse's health before the onset of the symptoms of the disease, the disease's symptoms, and the activities that he could no longer perform, the Court finds that the plaintiffs have cited a number of verdicts that this verdict does not deviate from.

It is also noted that the jury exercised great care in coming to this verdict. This is brought home by the observation that in the companion case that was tried jointly before the same jury, the verdict was in favor of the defendant. Thus, there is no basis to reduce the verdict in this case.

The Court has considered defendant's remaining arguments and finds them to be without merit.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the prong of this motion to vacate the jury's finding of reckless disregard for the safety of others is denied, and it is further

ORDERED that the prong of this motion to order that the amount of the verdict should be reduced by the plaintiffs or the verdict on damages be set aside and a new trial ordered is denied.

Settle judgment.

Dated: July 10, 2007Enter:

Louis B. York, J.S.C.