1012212010 %- .,TI
This Document Relates To:
JACK E. DONALDSON, SR (DEC)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JlJDGMENT WOTION ANI, ORDER
MEREFURF+ Defendant, American Financial GroupI hc. (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant") hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursumt to CPLR 9 32 12, dismissing Plaintiffs Complaint against Defendant, American Financial Group, Inc,, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon Notice to all Co-Defendants, all Claims and Cross-claim against Defendants, American Financial Group, Inc., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New Yorlc April 12,2010
WEITZ & LWJCFJWERG HODGSON RUSS, LLP 1 IL / L w - ~ R!!%!!&
Michsel Fanelli, Esquire
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
Alan Muraidekh, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant Arnerioan Financial Group, Inc.
60 East 4Zd Street New York, Now Yak 101
APR 30 8816 J.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
CfRPWTED:
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I
I NYCAL
I (Heitler, J.)
: Index No.: 117
ASBESTOS LITIGATION : I.A.S. Part30
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
EUGENE OBRIEN AND JANE O’BRIEN, I I I piEy6634’997 I
Plaintiff(s) I
! NO OPPOSITION
: MOTION AND ORDER I I
-against- : SUMMARY JUDGMENT
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
I Defendant( s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., hereby requests summary judgment
in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Courter & Company, Inc. with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., be ana the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and-
without casts.
Dated: New Y rk, New York 4 h ,2010
Attorneys for Defendants Courter & Company, lnc. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Eugene O’Brien and Jane O’Brien 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
1 122-3047
N0001062-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK :OUNTY OF NEW YORK
N RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
rHlS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
IAMES MARSHALL and MARY MARSHALL
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
< I,
WHEREFORE, defendant, BMCE Inc., hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, BMCE Inc., with prejudice in this action, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-de
against defendant BMCE Inc., be and t h e same are hereby dismissed
BMCE Inc. Weiner Lesniak LLP New York, NY I0003
888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppaugc, NY 11788
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
c
(I L
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
I
~~
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
JAMES MARSHALL and MARY MARSHALL ~
10.1 091 /oo
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Lockheed Martin Corp., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant, Lockheed Martin Corp., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Lockheed Martin Corp., be and the same are hereby
Attorneys fo r Defend ant Lockheed Martin Corp. Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY I 1788
New York, NY 10003
SO ORDERED, H
b--
< L
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Index No($&i /a 1 0 1 0 9 1 100
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
JAMES MARSHALL and MARY MARSHALL
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., hereby requests summary
udgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
lismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., with
mjudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
3gainst defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co., be a
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
Attorneys for Defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co. Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY 1 1788
Jew York, NY 10003
;O ORDERED,
AFR 302010
This Document Relates To:
JACK E. DONALDSON, SR (DEC)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, Defendant, American Financial Group, hc. (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant") hereby requests summq judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to CPLR 8 3212, dismissing Plaintiffs Complaint against Defendant, American Financial Group, Inc., with prejudice, and there being no opposition thrrreto,
ORDEFUCD, th8t upon Notice to all Co-Defendants, all CIaims and Cross-claims against Defendants, Amerioan Financial Group, h ~ . ~ be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudioe and without costs.
Dared: New York, New York April 12,201 0
.-. .
WEITZ & LUXENBERG HODGSON RUSS, LLP
b e , / A W L & ' - & \
Miclzsel Fanelli, Esquire
Attorneys far Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
Alan Muraidekh, Esquire Attorncya far Defendant Arnodcan Financial Group, hc.
60 East 4Zd Street New York, Now York 101
&W
J. IT I5 €0 ORDERED.
G W T E D :
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY X _ l_ - - - -_ l_ - - - -_"_r - -_________________r__-
ASBESTOS LIT1 GATION
Thomas J. Cruger, Sr.
*I
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index N o m
10522 1-98 11 1031-98 102783-00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X l - f _ _ _ _ * f r - - _ - l - - - -
WHEREFORE, defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co., hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co., with prejudice, and there being no opposition thedo ,
1 ORDEED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all
defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in inter the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and w
Dated: New York, New York
Weitz & Luxenberg, P.C. Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co. 150 East 42nd Street New York, New York 1001 7 2 12-490-3000
WAY". SO ORDERED,
4 1,~ 1 Our File No. 07536.08563
Hon. Sherry K. Heitkr kPR 3 0 2010
39491 75. I
1 . .
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _ _ _ _ _ “ _ _ 1 _ _ _ . . _ - - - _ 1 - _ - - - I - - I - - - - - - - - - r _ - ~ _ ~ - - ~ ~ - ~ - - ” -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Thomas J. Cruger, Sr,
. - - .. ..
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 1 1 1243-02 121 743-97
4-3 11 1031-98 102783-00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X - - - _
WHEREFORE, defendant EFUCSSON INC., as successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co., hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co., with prejudice, and there being no opposition
._. . thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defend defendant EFUCSSON INC., as successor in interest to Ana the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without c
Dated: New York, New York
Weitz & Luxenberg, P.C. Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New Y ork, New Y ork 10003 ERICSSON INC., as
successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co. 150 East 42“d Street New York, New York 10017
Our File No. 07536.08563 2 1 2-490-3000
SO ORDERED,
39491 75.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.) Index No: 106336198
EDWARD SHUBERT NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation,
F I L E D be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York,
Charles Ferguson, Esq. WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York I0022 (2 1 2) 52 1 -5400
SO ORDERED,
US-ACTIVE-IO34461 53.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
In Re: NEW YORK CITYASBESTOS LITIGATION Index No.: 106336198
NO OPPOSITION EDWARD SCHUBERT, SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff(s), MOTION
- against -
AC and S, INC., (ARMSGTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) et al.,
Defendants. ~
WHEREFORE, Defendant WIL-MCLAIN COMPANY, INC., hereinafter (“WEIL-
MCLAIN”) hereby requests Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against Defendant Weil-
McLain with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant, Weil-McLain be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs
to either party.
Dated: &d( 7 ,2010
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, NY 10003 (2 12) 558-5500
SINGER & MAHONEY, Attorneys for Defendant Weil-McLain 830 Third Avenue, Suite 400
New York, NY 10022 (2 12) 65 1-7500
SO ORDERED,
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _ _ _ r - - - - - " r _ - - - - _ l _ - - - - - - - " - - - - - - " - - - - - - -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Thomas J. Cruger, Sr.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 11 1243-02 121743-97
ZW$ 102783-00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X - - - - l - r - - - - L - - " _ - - - _ l r _ _ _ _ _ l _ _ _ _ _
WHEREFORE, defendant ERICSSON INC., as swccessor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co., hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' coinplaint against defendant ERICSSON LNC., as successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co., with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto, f
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in inter the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and w
Dated: New York, New York
Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
Wire & Cable Co. 150 East 42nd Street New York, New York 10017 2 12-490-3000 Our File No. 07536.08563
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry K. HeitNr
39491 75. I
APR 3 0 2010
This Document Relates To:
JACK E, DONALDSON, SR (DEC)
Index No.: 103649-97
105280-02
NO OPPOSITION SIJMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEJAEPOFE, Defendmt, American Financial Group, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant") hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to CPLR § 3212, dismissing Plaintiffs Complaint against Defendant, American Financial Oroup, Inc., with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDEFWD, that upon Notice to d l Co-Defendants, all Claims and Cross-claims against Defendants, Atnericm Financial Group, Inc., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
I Dated: New York, New Yilk
April 12,201 0
WEITZ & LUXENEERG HODGSON RUSS, U P
Michael Fanelli, Esquin
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Alan Muraidekh, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant American Financial Group, Inc.
700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 60 East 42' Street
New York, NOW York 101
s SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
JOSEPH P. MCDERMOTT and ROSALIE A. MC D E RM OTT
Index No. 112546/98
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Lockheed Martin Corp., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant, Lockheed Martin Corp., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Lockheed Martin Corp., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
fleitz & Luxenberg 700 Broadway - 7th floor New York, NY 10003 Weiner Lesniak LLP
888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY I 1788
SO ORDERED,
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
JOSEPH P. MCDERMOTT and ROSALIE A. MCDERMOTT
Index No. 112546/98
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
,2010
Attorneys for Plaintiff Weitz & Luxenberg 700 Broadway - 7th floor New York, NY 10003
A$p$neys for Defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co. Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Hauppauge,
APR 3 0 2010
NEW YORK CQUWfcLERKS-
SO ORDERED,
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
JUNIA L. CROCKETT as the Executrix for the Estate of ROBERT N. CROCKETT and JUNIA L. CROCKETT, Individually
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
DATED: 3 -31 , 2010
Attorneys for Defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co. Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Hauppauge, NY 11788
Weitz & Luxenberg 700 Broadway - 7th floor New York, NY 10003
__ SO ORDERED,
Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YOFX IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY ! NYCAL
j I.A.S. Part 30 ! (Heitler, J.)
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
JACQUELINE F, NOCK, Executrix for the Estate of ALAN S. MASTERS,
Plaintiffs,
-against-
Index No.: 100049/99
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
A. C. & S., INC., et al.
Defendants. !
WHEREFORE, defendant, Kentile Floors, Inc,, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3212, dismissing plaintiffs’
complaint against defendant, Kentile Floors, Inc., with prejudice in this action, and there being
no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Kentile Floors, Inc., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without
costs.
Dated: New Y rk, New York J p ,2010
Mamie A, Bartolomeo, Esq. Attorney for Defendant Kentile Floors, Inc. MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (21 2) 509-3456
F I L E D APR 3 o zaio
NEW YORK Couryn @ERNS
&aLpAwb B 4 ? & s t . Attorney for Plaintiffs Estate of Alan S. Masters WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
APR 3 0 2010 2082-905
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK lOUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION EDWARD MAZUR, JR. and BARBARA A. MAZUR, Plaintiff(s),
ADIENCE, INC., ET AL. Defendants.
vs.
m, -
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
/--? INDEX NO.-
125132100
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, improperly impleaded as DB Riley, Inc.
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without
costs. F I L E D 4 /48
m APR 3 o m a EW YORK C L E R K ' S O ~
RSON, McNEILL, P.C. Attorneys for Riley Stoker Corporation 233 Broadway New York, New York 10279
W Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway, 61h Fl. New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500 (2 12) 227-7878
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
CAROL ANN KNOPP, Individually and as Proposed Administratrix for the Estate of LESTER T. KNOPP
Index No. 103373/99
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
DATED: #p/ 5’ , 2010
Andrew M. Warshauer Attorneys for Defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co. i /( Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans
R Attorneys for Plaintiff Weitz & Luxenberg 700 Broadway - 7th f New York, NY 10003
Hauppauge,
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
5 536.09806/AJM SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW COUNTY OF NEW YORK
YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
This document relates to:
AUGUST ARRINDELL, Deceased,
Plaintiff,
vs . UNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION, et al.,
NYCAL IAS PART 30 (Honorable Sherry K-ein Heitler)
Index No. : 1 0 6 2 4 6 / 9 9
(May 2010 Monthly FIFO Trial Group)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, hereby
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
Complaint against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
crossclaims against defendant, United C o n v e F \oLEQ, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and withy%@&ts.
DATED : L/- q! 3 d/ c> East Hanover, New Jersey
h?R
WEITZ & LUXENBERG , GAROFALO Attorneys for Plaintiff & FLINN 700 Broadway Attorneys for Defendant, New York, New York 10003 United Conveyor Corporation
72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P.O. Box 438 East,Bnover, New Jersey 07936
SO ORDERED, Honorable Sherrykleid
.. . ... -. .
536.08144/AJM SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW Y W K K COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
This document relates to:
ANTHONY CATALINA,
Plaintiff,
vs .
UNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION, et al.,
NYCAL IAS PART 30 (Honorable Lierry Klein Heitler)
Index No. : 106275/99
(May 2010 Monthly FIFO Trial Group)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, hereby
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff's
Complaint against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
crossclaims against defendant, UnitedConveyor
are hereby dismissed with prejudice and same
DATED: c/-9-*>& East Hanover, New Jersey
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorneys f o r Plainti 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
APR 3 0 2010
GARRITY, GRAHAM, MURPHY, GAROFALO & FLINN Attorneys for Defendant, United Conveyor Corporation 72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P.O. Box 438 East Hanover, New Jersey 07936
SO ORDERED, /
Honorabfe kerry Klein Heitler
s 536.10126/AJM SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW 20UNTY OF NEW YORK
YORK
~
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
This document relates to:
HAROLD AMES, Deceased,
Plaintiff,
vs .
UNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.
NYCAL IAS PART 30 (Honorable Sherry K l e i n Heit,er)
Index No. : 106316/99
(May 2010 Monthly FIFO Trial Group)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, hereby
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
Complaint against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, a11 claims and
crossclaims against defendant, United Conveyor
same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
DATED : 727-2 d/ I) East Hanover, New Jersey
WEITZ & LUXENBERG GARRITY , GRAHAM, Attorneys for Plainti & FLINN 700 Broadway Attorneys for Defendant, New York, New York 10003 United Conveyor Corporation
72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P.O. Box 438
aver, New Jersey 07936
SO ORDERED, d
Honorable Sherry KTein Heitler ;;ti a 3 0 2010
c
536.10245/AJM SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
This document relates to:
GEORGE L. CHAMPAGNE, Deceased, :
Plaintiff,
UNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.
3 YORK
NYCAL IAS PART 3 0 (Honorable Sherry K-sin Heitler)
Index No, : 106337 /99
(May 2010 Monthly FIFO Trial Group)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, hereby
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff's
Complaint against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
crossclaims against defendant, Unitedconveyor Cor
same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
r t on I L ee,& t$e
DATED : yH $?~Jd/d APR 3 0 2010 East Hanover, New Jersey
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorneys for Plainti & FLINN 700 Broadway Attorneys for Defendant, New York, New York 10003 United Conveyor Corporation
72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P.O. Box 438 East Hanover, New Jersey 07936
SO ORDERED, Honorable Sher2y Klein Heitler
P,PR 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No.: 1 1 1 152/99 THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
CAROL E. SAWYER, AS EXECUTRIX OF THE I ESTATE OF DONALD H. SAWYER,
I NO OPPOSITION I I
Plaintiff( s) ! SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- ; MOTION AND ORDER I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendantls). I
3
i WHEREFORE, defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 4 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. with prejudice, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDEMD, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York @ d q ,2010
Michael Fanelli, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiff Estate ofDonald Sawyer F 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
L E D APR 3 0 2010 (2 12) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
1 122-3223
NO00 1443- I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL,
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
I Index No.: 1 1 1 152199 I
I I
CAROL E. SAWYER, AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF DONALD H. SAWYER,
I
NO OPPOSITION
MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiff( s) I SUMMARY JUDGMENT
1 I
-against- I I I I I I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant(s).
WHEREFORE, defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 0 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation with prejudice, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Tishrnan Liquidating Corporation be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice
and without costs.
Dated: Ne Y rk, New York g;i 4 ,2010
AL F I L E D Michael Fanelli, Esq.
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Tishman Liquidating Corporation Estate of Donald Sawyer APR 3 0 2010 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff
700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 NEW YORK
Gf3JmclERics- (212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
2383-4240
N0001447-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN E: NEW YORK COUNTY I NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
I I
I
I I
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I Index No.: 1 1 1 152/99
CAROL E. SAWYER, AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF DONALD H. SAWYER,
I
NO OPPOSITION Plaintiff( s) I SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- : MOTION AND ORDER I I I I I I
I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant( s). I
\
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation with prejudice, and there being no opposition
thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York k[,l 4 ,2010
Michael Fanelli, EG.
Attorneys for Plaintiff Estate of Donald Sawyer 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
Y & KLUGER, P.C. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Treadwell Corporation 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 APR 3 0 2010
NEW YORK (212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
c f J u N N c m K $ ~
1235-2742
SO ORDERED,
- * N0001446-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YOFX
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X ____________II____________l_____________-
ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J .)
Index Nofi 13354/99/ 124339/00
Marjorie Ann Pauze, as Administratrix for the Estate of Alan Edward Pauze, and Marjorie Ann Pauze, Individually
..
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X * - + l w l - - - - - f
WHEREFORE, defendant A. W. CHESTERTON COMPANY hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant A. W. CHESTERTON COMPANY with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York p y / .<'" 13
Danny Kraft, Esq. Weitz & Luxenberg, PC Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, N.Y., 10003
SO ORDERED,
3885749. I
APR 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK I _ l _ _ _ _ _ l _ _ _ _ _ f _ _ _ l _ _ l - - l - l - - l - - - - - - - l - - " X
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Alan Edward Pauze
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
Index N- 124339/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Frank M. Ortiz, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500 33 Washington Street
Adam J. Kipds, Esq. 1 WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
OAKFABCO, INC.
Newark, New J e r s e c B - 3 0 17 973-624-0800
SO ORDERED,
APR 3 U 2010 959877.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _____ l -_ - - -_ l__"_ - - -____________ l f r_____-
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
George Allen
NYCAL 1.A.S Part 30 (Heitler, S.)
Index No: 113378/99
NO OPPOSITION i I SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York f 4 L /2 , Z ~ I O
22&LzAL Matthew MacIntyre, I&. WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 212-558-5500
SO ORDEED, b
WILSON, E ~ S E ~ , MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 071 02-3017 973-624-0800
F I L E D
Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
947827.1
s 536.10614/AJM ;UPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 30UNTY OF NEW YORK
I N RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
%is document relates to:
3EORGE W. ALLEN,
Plaintiff,
vs .
JNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION, st al.,
Defendants.
NYCAL IAS PART 30 (Honorable Sherry Klein Heitler)
Index No. : 113378/99
(May 2010 Monthly FIFO Trial Group 1
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, hereby
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
Zivil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff's
Zomplaint against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
crossclaims against defendant, United Convey0 q o \ p k a E o n e and the
same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without APR 3 <%bs.
DATED : y- 9.2 d/ 0 East Hanover, New Jersey
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorneys for Plaintif & FLINN 700 Broadway Attorneys for Defendant, New York, New York 10003 United Conveyor Corporation
72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P.O. Box 438
Hanover , New Jersey 07 93 6
- SO ORDERED, 10 eitlea"PR 'j
3 ;36.01480/AJM ;UPREME COURT O F THE STATE OF NEW YORK IOUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
chis document relates to:
NYCAL IAS PART (Honorab
IONALD C. ALLEN, Deceased,
Plaintiff,
VS.
JNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION, ?t al.,
Defendants.
30 e Sherry K ein Heitler)
Index No. : 113379/99
(May 2010 Monthly FIFO Trial Group)
NO OPPOSITION SuMMaRY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
Iivil Practice Law and Rules Section 3 2 1 2 , dismissing plaintiff's
Zomplaint against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
crossclaims against defendant, United Conv FIVE@, be and the
same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
DATED : L/- 7-2 dJ/d East Hanover, New Jersey
APR 3 0
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorneys for Plaintiff & FLINJY 700 Broadway Attorneys for Defendant, New York, New York 10003 United Conveyor Corporation
72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P.O. Box 438
ersey 07936
SO ORDERED, W '
Honorable Sherry Kleh Heitler
, j i q i 3 0 2019
I
I
This Document Relates Ta:
JACK E. DONALDSON, SR (DEC)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JIJDGMENT JPIOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFOIRE, Defendant, American Financial Group, hnc. (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant") hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitIed case, pursuant to CPLR § 3212, dismissing Plaintiffs Complaint against Defendant, American Financial Group, Inc., with prejudice, and &here being no opposition themto,
ORDERED$ that upan Notice to all Co-Defendants, all CIaims and Cross-claims against Defendants, American FEnanoid Group, Inc., be md the same wre hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New Yo& ApiI 12,201 0
-4- WEITZ & LUXENBERG HODGSON RUSG, LLP
Michsel Fanelli, Esquire
Atbrneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New Yotk 10003
Alan Muraidekh, Esquire Attorneys for Defendant American Financial Group, Iric.
60 East 42"d Street Now Yark, New York 101
CIRANTED:
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW Y O N COUNTY : NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
EUGENE OBRIEN AND JANE O'BRIEN,
I I I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.) I
: Index No.: 1 17398/02, 104861/97 I
I I I Plaintiff(s) I
I NO OPPOSITION -against- SUMMARY JUDGMENT
A.C. & S., NC., et al,, I MOTION AND OFWER I I I
Defendant( s), I I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., hereby requests summary judgment
in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing plaintiff's
complaint against defendant, Courter & Company, Inc. with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and .-
without costs.
Attorneys for Defendants Courter & Company, Inc. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Eugene O'Brien and Jane O'Brien 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(21 2) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
I 122-3047
N0001062-I
536.07583/AJM UPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW :OUNTY OF NEW YORK
YORK
:N RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
'his document relates to:
IETER H. ARANSON, Deceased,
Plaintiff,
VS . JNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION, ?t al.,
Defendants.
NYCAL I A S PART 30 (Honorable S,,erry Klein Heitler)
Index No. : 117930/99
(May 2010 Monthly FIFO Trial Group)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
livil Practice Law and Rules Section 3 2 1 2 , dismissing plaintiff's
:omplaint against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, with
?rejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
xossclaims against defendant, United Conveyor Corpor L,&c:psbe% and the
same are hereby dismissed with prejudice a n p k
DATED : q4- q-2 J/ 0 East Hanover, New Jersey
WEITZ & LUXENBERG EsQ*% FRANK M', ORTIZ,
Attorneys f o r Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
.-
GARRITY , GRAHAM, MURPHY, GAROFALC & FLINN Attorneys for Defendant, United Conveyor Corporation 72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P . O . Box 438
nover, New Jersey 07936
SO ORDERED, Honorable Sherry Klein Heitler
1 L *
c ;36.06788/AJM ;UPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK lOUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
rhis document relates to:
3ERMAN BORDEN, Deceased,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION, 2t al.,
NYCAL I A S PART (Honorab
30 e Sherry Klein H it1
Index No. : 118277/99
(May 2010 Monthly FIFO Trial Group)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, hereby
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
zivil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff's
Zomplaint against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
crossclaims against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, be and the
same are hereby dismissed
DATED : y- $/2d / 0 East Hanover, New Jersey
WEITZ & LUXENBERG FRANK M. ORTIZ,
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
EsQ--+s
with prej
w - & FLINN Attorneys for Defendant, United Conveyor Corporation 72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P . O . Box 438 East Hanover, New Jersey 07936
<-
SO ORDERED, Y
' ;"io2010 Honorable Sherry Klein Heitler , II I S " u
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _"---__l_--_-------_ll____l_______ll____-
,
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Stephen Meyer
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, S.)
Index No: 120263/99
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and thc game are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
e% &- WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC.
Newark, New Jersey 07 1 02-30 17
Matthew MacIntyre, E s d WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 212-558-5500 33 Washington Street
973-624-0800
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
APR 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY j NYCAL
j I.A.S. Part 30 i (Heitler, J.)
j Index No.: 120812/99
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
KATHLEEN RAMSDEN, Individually and as Administratrix for the Estate of CHARLES RAMSDEN, [ NO OPPOSITION
j SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiffs, [ MOTION AND ORDER
-against-
A. C , & S., INC., et al.
Defendants. !
WHEREFORE, defendant, Kentile Floors, Inc., hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant, Kentile Floors, Tnc., with prejudice in this action, and there being
no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Kentile Floors, Inc., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without
costs.
Dated: Ne Y k, New York yp5 ,2010
F I L E D APR 3 o zoia
q f W VORK ( A N N CISRK'SOF-
amie A. Bartolomeo, Esq. bydl\ ES.6- Attorney for Defendant Kentile Floors, Inc. MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004
Attorney for Plaintiffs Kathleen Ramsden and Estate of Charles Ramsden WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(2 12) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
2082-1053
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ALL COUNTIES WITHIN NEW YORK CITY ___________--______-1__________1_1___ -X IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY
ASBESTOS LITIGATION _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - _ - - - - - - _ _ - - -X This Document Relates to: Rudell Harry Belvin and Adele Biele Belvin,
Plaintiffs, - against -
A.C. & S . Inc., et al.,
c
\
NYCAL I.A.S. P a r t 30 (Judge Heitler)
Index No. 6- Index No. 103812 00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Goulds Pumps I n c . , hereby request
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civi
Complaint against defendant Goulds Pumps Inc., with prejudice, an
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims ar
cross claims against defendant Goulds Pumps Inc . , be dismissed w i t
prejudice and without costs.
Dated: Brooklyn, New York r!!b : Just' Cullen M. and Tafe, Dykman Esq. LLP
, 2 0 1 0
Michael Fanelli, Esq. Weitz EL Lumnberg, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Rudell H a r r y B e l v i n and Goulds Pumps Inc . Adele Biele B e l v i n 177 Montague Street 700 Broadway, 6th Floor Brooklyn, New York 11201
Attorneys for Defendant
LE New York, New York LOO03 (718) 855-9000 : 6 7 5 f h 4
3 0 IQIQ So Ordered: @R
W R 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY ! NYCAL
j I.A.S. Part 30 i (Heitler, J.)
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
ANTHONY BURZESI,
Plaintiffs, i NO OPPOSITION ! SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- i MOTION AND ORDER
A. C. & S., INC., et al.
Defendants. \ WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 9 3212, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York 3 p ,2010
Treadwell Corporation MCG~VNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (2 12) 509-3456
Anthony Burzesi
700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P,c.
(212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, r Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
.~ 1235-1 001 7
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 ON
This Document Relates to:
RICHARD KURTZ
NYCAL I.A.S. Part30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190205109 106430100
&mm7q>
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto, .-
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly -known as Dana Corporation,
be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without cost F\LED
Charles F e r g E , tsq. WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
- REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 521-5400
SO ORDERED, 2010
US-ACTIVE-1 03445024 1
. - .~ - - . . _-
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW Y O N COUNTY ! C d ' h T Y OF NEW YORK
NYCAL ; 1,A.S. Part 30
I Index No.: 10943 1 /O 122 1 89/99
I (Heitler, J.) ASBESTOS LITIGATION
'THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: 1
I a JOHN L. MATHIS AND JUDITH L. MATHIS, I I I
Plaintiff(s) I NO OPPOSiTION I SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- MOTION AND OFtDER I I I I I I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant( s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules $ 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. with prejudice, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against .-- .
defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
ApR 3 0 Dated: New York, New York hni ,2010
Michael Fanelli, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff John 1;. Mathis and Judith L. Mathis 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for Defendants Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 1212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500 , ,
SO ORDERED,
NO001 125-1
324-50601
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN FE: NEW YORK COUNTY { NYCAL
I I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.)
ASBESTOS LITlGATTON I
I
Index No.: 1 0943 1 /O 122 1 89/99 JOHN L. MATHIS AND JUDITH L. MATHIS, I I
a THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
I I
Plainti ff(s) I NO OPPOSITION I SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- MOTION AND ORDER I I I A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant( s). I I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., hereby requests summary judgment
in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Courter & Company, Inc. with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Courter & Company, Inc, be and the same are hereby dismissd with prejudice and
3
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York *,I 4 ,2010
Michael Fanelli, Esq. WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendants Courter & Company, Inc, 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff John L. Mathis and Judith L. Mathis 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
11 22-14463
NOOOll24-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY : NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
TI-TIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
JOHN L. MATHIS AND JUDITH L. MATHIS,
; I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.)
I Index No.: 1 0943 1 /O I
122 1 89/99 I I 53 I I
Plaintiff( s) I NO OPPOSITION I SUMMARY JUDGMENT I MOTION AND ORDER -against- I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant(s). I I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 0 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation with prejudice, and there being no opposition
thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and .-
without costs.
Dated: New Y rk, New York y-4 ,2010
Michael Fanelli, Esq. N~-QFR# WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendants Treadwell Corporation 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
Attorneys for Plaintiff John L. Mathis and Judith L. Mathis 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
1235-1 4073
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I I NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION : I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.)
I Index No.: 1 0943 1 /OO, THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
JOHN L. MATHIS AND JUDITH L. MATHIS, I I
I
Plaintiff( s) I NO OPPOSITION SIJMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- MOTION AND ORDER I
A.C. & S., INC., et al., I
I Defendant( s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation with prejudice, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice
and without costs.
Dated: Ne Y rk, New York l? ,2010
Attorneys for Defendants Tishman Liquidating Corporation 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
Michael Fanelli, Esq. WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff John L. Mathis and Judith Mathis 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
2383-40051 /.,r;'R 3 0 2010
NO@@] 122-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YOFX
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l l _ l _ r _ _ _ _ _ l _ r _ _ _ _ _ _ -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Royal Howard Trimlett
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs. _- Dated: New York, New York
U P ! ! L A 3d3 9 m
Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500
WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jer y 71 973-624-08OF e Fob
I
SO ORDERED, APR 3 0 2010
NEW YORK ~ U N W CERKS om=
959877.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
Albert Pallamollo
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
10928 1 /00 1 15948/03
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
_ _ r - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l - - _ _ _ _ ~ _ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ - ~ _ _ _ _ - - ~ - ~ x
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500 33 Washington Street I
OAKFABCO, INC.
Newark, New Jersey 071 02-301 7 973-624-0800
SO ORDERED,
959877.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
\ I ,
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
SABE VARSANO
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30, (Heitler. J.)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff's complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto, .-
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana corporation,
be and the same are hereby dismissed
Dated: New York, New York (-1-1 y- 3
I_
Charles Ferguson, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
with
-
prejudice and without costs.
Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (2 I 2) 52 1 -5400
3 0 2010 SO ORDERED,
US-ACTIVE-1 03446225.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW Y O N COUNTY
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
MALICK D. BYRNE AND ELIZABETH A. BYRNE,
Plaintiffs,
-against-
A. C. & S., TNC., et al.
Defendants.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND OlRDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests s~unrnauy judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York N4Rci4 A ,2010
I !
I i
Attorney for Defendant Attorney for Plaintiffs Treadwell Corporation MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (21 2) 509-3456
Malick D. Byrne and Elizabeth A. Byrne WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
1235-9975
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK _- - -_________I_________________I_____ -X IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY
ASBESTOS LITIGATION _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I _ -X This Document Relates to: ESTATE ARNOLD TOM LITTLEWOOD, LITTLEWOOD ARNOLD M, LITTLEWOOD EVA M
Plaintiff ( s ) - against -
Burnham, LLC, et al.
NYCAL I.A.S. P a r t 30 (Judge Heitler)
Index No.:125070/99
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMF,NT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Burnham, LLC as successor to Burnham
Corporation. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-
entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section
§ 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant
Burnham, LLC as successor to Burnham Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims
and cross-claims against defendant Burnham, LLC as successor to
Burnham Corporation, be dismissed with prejudice and without
costs.
Dated: Brooklyn, New York 4114 , 2010 rAdw-
mi&u\ F A ~ ~ I ; , E s q . Weitz & Luxenberg, LLC Attorneys f o r Plaintiff ( s ) ESTATE ARNOLD TOM BURNHAM, LLC . , LITTLEWOOD, LITTLEWOOD 177 Montague Street ARNOLD M, LITTLEWOOD EVA M Brooklyn, New York 11201
New York, NY 10038 Our File No.: 11084-1 Tel No. : (212) 558-5500
700 Broadway (718) 855-9000
Hon. &E%y k. Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK _________ I___________________ I_______ -X IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I.A.S. Part 30
______-I____________-------__-------- -X This Document Relates to: Index No. : 125070/99 ESTATE ARNOLD TOM LITTLEWOOD, NO OPPOSITION LITTLEWOOD ARNOLD M, LITTLEWOOD EVA M, SUMMARY JUDGMENT
P 1 aint i f f ( s ) MOTION AND ORDER
NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION (Judge Heitler)
- against -
GOULDS PUMPS, INC., et al.
Defendants. -X
WHEREFORE, defendant GOULDS PUMPS, INC. hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section § 3212, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant GOULDS PUMPS, INC., with prejudice,
and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims
and cross claims against defendant GOULDS PUMPS, INC., be
dismissed with prejudice and
Dated:
without costs.
P A FJLED
a n q (ICE
d Dykman LLP \Att/ok6ys for Defendant Attorneys f o r Plaintiff ( s )
ESTATE ARNOLD TOM WLDS PUMPS, INC. LITTLEWOOD, LITTLEWOOD 177 Montague Street ARNOLD M, LITTLEWOOD EVA M Brooklyn, New York 11201
New York, New York 10003 Our File No.:6754-4418 700 Broadway (718) 855-9000
212-558-5500
0 z m P i
So Ordered:
5 3 6 . 0 8 4 0 3 / A J M SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
This document relates to:
VIRGINIA M. BURNS, Deceased,
Plaintiff,
vs .
UNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.
NYCAL IAS PART 30 (Honorable Sherry Klein Heitler)
Index No. : 1 2 5 0 7 3 / 9 9
(May 2010 Monthly FIFO Trial Group)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, hereby
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff's
Complaint against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
crossclaims against defendant, United
same are hereby dismissed with prejudice an
DATED: ?.--A/$ East Hanover, New 3 0 2014 Jersey
GARRITY, GRAHAM, MURPHY, GAROFALO & FLINN
700 Broadway Attorneys for Defendant, New York, New York 10003 United Conveyor Corporation
72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P.O. Box 438
SO ORDERED, -
Honorable Sherry Klein Heitler Ai-jK 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _ _ _ l - - - - - - - - - - r " r l r _ _ _ _ _ l l _ _ _ _ l f _ _ l _ _ _ _ _ -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
Index No: 100547/00
Allan Charles Reese NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon n against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., b without costs.
Dated: New York, New York La/& 7 3 , Z d O
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500 33 Washington Street
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
OAKFABCO, INC.
Newark, New Jersey 07102-301 7 973-624-0800
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
A.PR 302010
959877. I
. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. - - -.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
. . . . . ._ .
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
JAMES MARSHALL and MARY MARSHALL Index No. 109647197
p-> NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, BMCE Inc., hereby requests summary judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, BMCE Inc., with prejudice in this action, and
t h e r e being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-de
against defendant BMCE fnc., be and the same are hereby dismissed
Broadway - 7th floor
Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY 11788
New York, NY 10003
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
1N RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO;
JAMES MARSHALL and MARY MARSHALL
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Lockheed Martin Corp., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 3 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, Lockheed Martin Corp., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED,that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant Lockheed Martin Corp., be and the same are hereby
New York, NY 10003 Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY 11788
SO ORDERED,
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
JAMES MARSHALL and MARY MARSHALL Index No. 109647/97
Q-0-J
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., hereby requests summary
judgment in t h e above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co., be
prejudice-and without costs.
New York, NY 10003
and the same are hereby
Robert A. Keasbey Co, Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY I1788
SO ORDERED,
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW Y O N CITY X ___l_-- - - l l__r- -___lr - - - - - - I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Thomas J. Cruger, Sr
NYCAL I.A.S, Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 11 1243-02 12 1743-97 10522 1-98
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co., hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in interest tu Anaconda Wire & Cable Co., with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
I -7 ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all
defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in inter the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and w
Dated: New York, New York
Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co. 150 East 42"d Street New York, New York 10017
Our File No. 07536.08563 2 12-490-3000
kpR '3 0 2010 SO ORDERED,
39491 75.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
ANTHONY BURZESI,
Plaintiffs,
-against-
A. C. & S., INC., et al.
Defendants.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No.: 121854/9 1 03 594100 0 NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing plaintiffs’
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treaawell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York q v j ,2010
Treadwell Corporation MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
Anthony Burzesi WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
>.< 3 0 2010 y “ 4 fi
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ALL COUNTIES WITHIN NEW YORK CITY _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -X IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY
ASBESTOS LITIGATION _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ - - -X This Document Relates to: Rudell Harry Belvin and Adele Biele Belvin,
Plaintiffs, - against -
A . C . & S. Inc., et a l . ,
NY CAI; I.A.S. Par t 30 (Judge Heitler)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Goulds Pumps I n c . , hereby requestz
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 53212, dismissing plaintiffs'
Complaint against defendant Goulds Pumps I n c . , w i t h prejudice, anc
there being no opposition thereto, -
ORDERED, that upon notice to a l l co-defendants, all claims anc
cross claims against defendant Goulds Pumps Inc. , be dismissed w i t 1
prejudice and without cos ts .
Dated: Brooklyn, New York Lllrlp , 2 0 1 0
Michael Fanelli, Esq. Weitz ti L-axrnberg, P.C. Cullen ar,d Dykrnan LLP Attorneys f o r Plaintiffs Rudell H a r r y B e l v i n and Go u 1 ds Pumps In c . A d e l e B i e l e B e l v i n 177 Montague Street 700 Broadway, 6th Floor Brooklyn, New York 11201
Attorneys for Defendant
New York, New York 10003 (718) 8 5 5 - 9 0 0 0 Our File No. : 6 7 5 p &
So Ordered: @
APR 3 0 2010
rl SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY j NYCAL
3 ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
MALICK D. BYRNE AND ELIZABETH A. BYRNE,
j I.A.S. Part 30 ! (Heitler, J.)
: Index No.:
i NO OPPOSITION
\ MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, j SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against-
A. C. & S., INC,, et al.
Defendants. !
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defgndants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York M441~44 ,A ,2010
&,"'
Attorney for Plaintiffs Malick D. Byrne and Elizabeth A. Byrne WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
Treadwell Corporation MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
SO ORDERED,
1235-9975
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
ROSEMARY SCHIANO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF DANIEL SCHIANO
Index No. 105249/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Lockheed Martin Corp., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant, Lockheed Martin Corp., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Lockheed Martin Corp., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
DATED: I
4ttor 3 eys for Plaintiff deitz & Luxenberg 700 Broadway - 7th floor Vew York, NY 10003
201 0
Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY I 1 788
5 0 ORDERED,
. .. .
c &4
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
ROSEMARY SCHIANO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF DANIEL SCHIANO
Index No. 105249/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., hereby requests summary
udgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3212,
jismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., with
irejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
against defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
irejudice and without costs.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
JATED: ,2010
Andrew M. Warshauer Attorneys for Defendant Robert A. Keas 700 Broadway - 7th floor
New York, NY 10003
Hauppauge, NY 1 1788
5 0 ORDERED,
APR 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
ROSEMARY SCHIANO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF DANIEL SCHIANO
Index No. 105249/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
I ,'
WHEREFORE, defendant, BMCE Inc., hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, BMCE Inc., with prejudice in this action, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant BMCE Inc., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice
and without costs.
DATED: 201 0
Andrew M. Warshauer Attorneys for Defendant BMCE Inc. Weiner Lesniak LLP
Neitz 8 Luxenberg 700 Broadway - 7th floor Vew York. NY 10003
888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY I 1 788
SO ORDERED,
... . -. . .. . .. . ..
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
DANIEL SCHIANO AND ROSEMARY I
SCHIANO,
i I.A.S. Part 30 ; (Heitler, J.)
I Index No.: 105249/00 I
I I
I NO OPPOSITION
I MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiff(s) i I SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I
I I I I I I
-against- I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant(s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 8 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation with prejudice, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice
and without costs.
Dated: Ngw York, New York
/APR O *010
McGiv KLUGER, P.C. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Tishman Liquidating Corporation 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Daniel Schiano and Rosemary Schiano 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
NOOOl805-I
Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
APR 3 0 2010 2383-2709
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 ; (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
DANIEL SCHIANO AND ROSEMARY SCHIANO, I
Index No.: 105249/00 I I I
I NO OPPOSITION
; MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiff( s) ; SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I
I -against- I
A.C. & S., INC., et al., I
Defendant(s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., hereby requests summary judgment
in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 8 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Courter & Company, Inc. with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
Attorneys for Defendants Courter & Company, Inc. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Daniel Schiano and Rosemary Schiano 700 Broadway New York, New York I O O O F I L E D
P-
APR 3 0 2010
NEW YORK cnuru7-Y cum#@$ o m
(212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
NO00 I801 - I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No.: 105249/00 THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
DANIEL SCHIANO AND ROSEMARY SCHIANO, I
I I
I NO OPPOSITION
I MOTION AND ORDER
I
Plaintiff(s) I SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- I I I I I I I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant(s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Patterson Pump Company, hereby requests summary judgment
in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Patterson Pump Company with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Patterson Pump Company, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: N w York, New York @- ,2010
Attorneys for Defendants Patterson Pump Company 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
A
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff Daniel Schiano and Rosem Schiano
New 700 Broadway York, New York 1000 P I L E D (2 12) 558-5500
APR 3 o zoia
NEW YORK C a U N T V C ~ ~ S ~ 4 -3 0
SO ORDERED,
FPR 3 0 2010 NDOOl798- I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK TN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
DANIEL SCHIANO AND ROSEMARY SCHIANO, I
: I.A.S. Part 30 ( (Heitler, J.)
: Index No.: 105249/00 I
I I I
I NO OPPOSITION Plaintiff( s) SUMMARY JUDGMENT
MOTION AND ORDER -against- I
I I I I I I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant( s) . I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation with prejudice, and there being no opposition
thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
6a&ook, Esq. Daniel Blouin,&sq. VNEY & KLUGER, P.C. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendants Treadwell Corporation 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Daniel Schiano and Rosemary @i#o L E D 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500 APR 3 o ma
SO ORDERED, ~ U N ~ c L E R l c S Q F F l c F NEW YORK
1235-6497
NOOOI 802-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I NYCAL,
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
I Index No.: 105249/00 I I I
DANIEL SCHIANO AND ROSEMARY SCHIANO, I
I NO OPPOSITION Plaintiff( s) SUMMARY JUDGMENT
MOTION AND ORDER -against- I
I I I I I I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
De fendant(s). I
WHEMFORE, defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 0 3212, dismissing
plaintiff's complaint against defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. with prejudice, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
aniel Blouin, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiff Daniel Schiano and Rosemary Schiano 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
F I L E & WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 *PR 3 0 zore (212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
p#F - -- 324-5269
NOOOI 793-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 ON
This Document Relates to:
RICHARD KURT2
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No:-
12 1981/99
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto, .* .
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, ~
be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without cost
Dated: New York,
Charles Ferguson, WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York I0022 (212) 521-5400
SO ORDERED, 2010
US-ACTIVE-1 03445024.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
SABE VARSANO
IndexNo: 1
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross .-
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York F I L E D
v-\y-\Cl
Charles Ferguson, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York I0003
Y New York, New York 10022
(21 2) 558-5500 (212) 521-5400
SO ORDERED, Hon. S h e r j K; tleitler
US-ACTIVE-I 03446217.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30, IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY
(Heitler, J.) ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 0 N
SABE VARSANO fl07144100 >
125770199
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto, .-.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation,
be and the same are hereby dismissed
Dated: New York, New York +I T-\a
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (2 12) 558-5500
with
I
prejudice and without costs.
Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (21 2) 521 -5400
SO ORDERED, 3 0 2010 Hon. SKerG K. Heitler
US-ACTIVE-1 03446225.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _ " " _ _ _ _ _ l l _ _ _ _ _ _ " l _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - l l l - - - " - - - - - - - - - - - -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
Index No&=) 122 198/99
Royal Howard Trimlett NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
Frank M. Ortiz, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG \ Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 212-558-5500
WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark,New r y 71 973-624-080!$1 e gob
I
APR 3 0 2010
NEW YORK mUNTY CLERK'S 0-
Won. Sherry Klein Heitler SO ORDERED,
959877.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X __-__- -___- -" - -_ l - -____l___r__l_________-
ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
112458/00 Rudolph F. Migliore
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKF being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-de against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same ar without costs.
Dated: New York, New York l!&imzaab
Frank M. Ortiz, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500 33 Washington Street
Adam 1. M n i s , Es4 WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
OAKFABCO, INC.
Newark, New Jersey 07102-3017 973-624-0800
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
959877.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X ___ l____- - f - -__ -_____ l____ l___________r_ -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Albert Pallamollo
NYCAL I.A.S. Pm 39 (Heitler, S.)
1 15948/03
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X - - - - - * . , - - - - -
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, .- INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500
OAKFABCO, NC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 07102-3017 973 -624-0800
SO ORDERED,
959877.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.) I
IndexN .. 109431/00 1221&9/99 I I 0 THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
JOHN L. MATHIS AND JUDITH L, MATHIS, I I
Plaintiff( s) I NO OPPOSITION : SUMMARY JUDGMENT -against- : MOTION AND ORDER
I I I I I I
J
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant( s).
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation with prejudice, and there being no opposition
thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New Y rk, New York Ilj 4 ,2010
7*- MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendants Treadwell Corporation 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (2 12) 509-3456
2%
I
I
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff John L. Mathis and Judith L. Mathis 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
1235-14073
NO001 123-1 APR 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY ' I NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
JOHN L. MATHIS AND JUDITH L. MATHIS,
: I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.) I
Index No. 10943 1 /00 122 1 89/99 I I I 0 I
Plaintiff( s) I NO OPPOSITION : SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- MOTION AND ORDER I
A.C. & S., INC., et al., I
Defendant@). I I
WHEREFORE, defendant Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. with prejudice, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York h d I 9 ,2010
3
i ', 1
I
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C.
John L. Mathis and Judith L. Mathis 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for Defendants Attorneys for Plaintiff b
Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
A A
SOORDEED, 1 Hon .
324-50601
NO001 125-1 bPW 3 0 2018'
--.--
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I I NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I /-7 I I Index N y 4 3 1/00) 122 1 89/99
JOHN L. MATHIS AND JUDITH L. MATHIS, I I I
Plaintiff( s) NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- MOTION AND ORDER I
A.C. & S,, INC., et al., I I I I I Defendantls).
WHEREFORE, defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., hereby requests summary judgment
in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules yj 3212, dismissing plaintiff's
complaint against defendant, Courter & Company, Inc. with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Courter & Company, Inc, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York *I1 q ,2010
3
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Courter & Company, Inc. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (2 12) 509-3456
Attorneys for Plaintiff John L. Mathis and Judith L. Mathis 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (2 12) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
1122-14663
NOOOl124-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J,)
Index No : 10943 1/00 122 189/99 I c3 THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
JOHN L. MATHIS AND JUDITH L. MATHIS, I
I I
Plaintiff( s) I NO OPPOSITION SIJMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- MOTION AND ORDER I
A.C. & S., INC., et al,, I I I I Defendant(s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation with prejudice, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice
and without costs.
Dated: Ne rk, New York ,2010
LUGER, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Tishman Liquidating Corporation 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
Michael Fanelli, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiff John L. Mathis and Judith Mathis 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C.
(212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
APR 3 0 201fl 2383-40051
,I
I
I
I !
j i I
NO001 122-1
G k
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
KARL MULLER Index No. 109465/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co., be and the same are
orejudice and without costs.
DATED:
O W
Robert A. Keasbey Co. Weiner Lesniak LLP
700 Broadway - 7th floor Vew York, NY 10003
888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY I 1788
3 0 ORDERED,
1-
< Ls.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK C I N ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
KARL MULLER Index No. 109465/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Lockheed Martin Corp., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 3 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant, Lockheed Martin Corp., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, c i s a against defendant Lockheed Martin Corp., be and the sa # e a k & r e c i!#!is:dmzith
ApR 3 0 2010 prejudice and without costs.
Weitz 8 Luxenberg 700 Broadway - 7th floor New York, NY 10003
Lockheed Martin Corp. Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY 1 1788
SO ORDERED,
e
,+
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
IRVING BERNSTEIN AND IDA BERNSTEIN,
Plaintiffs,
-against-
A. C. & S . , INC., et al.
Defendants.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
, 2010 F I L E D
APR 3 0 2010
Treadwell Corporation MCGIVNEY & UUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
Irving Bernstein and Ida Bernstein
700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C.
(212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, > Won. Sherry Klein Heitler
ii;;"d 3 0 2010 1235-480
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YOFX COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _______ I____________r_ l_ r______r_______ l -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
John M. Mallon
NYCAL 1,A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, S.) n
Index N<-0 121 5 1400
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ross claims ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are without costs.
Dated: New York, New York fi\-cJAGh 2"" 7 i?&!L
m Z&> Matthew MacIntyre, E&. WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500 33 Washington Street
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
OAKFABCO, INC.
Newark, New Jersey 071 02-30 17 973-624-0800
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
904073.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW Y O N CITY _ _ _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 _ _ 1 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - X
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Rudolph F. Migliore
CAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, XNC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAK being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-de against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same ar without costs.
Dated: New York, New York l i 4 G t a a X Q
Adam 1. M n i s , E s t WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
OAKFABCO, INC.
Newark, New Jersey 07 102-301 7
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500 33 Washington Street
973-624-0800
SO ORDERED, % Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
959a77. I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY ! NYCAL
j I.A.S. Part 30 ASBESTOS LITIGATION ! (Heitler, J,)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
BETTY J. SCHRANCK, Individually as Personal Representative for the Estate of RUSSELL SCHmNCK,
Plaintiffs,
-against-
A. C. & S., INC., el al.
Defendants.
Index No.: 113834/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New ork, New 3 /bl Y
York 2010
F I L E D
COUNTY CLERK'S
. Cook, Esq. Attorney for Defendant Attorney for Plaintiffs Treadwell Corporation MCGIVNEV & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (2 12) 509-3456
Betty J. Schranck and Estate of Russell Schranck WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. S h e q x l e i n Heitler
1235-1266
4
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK IOUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION JOAN MALASPINA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF FAUSTO MALASPINA, Plaintiff(s),
A.C. and S., INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) ET AIL. Defendants.
-clr*ii*p
vs.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
INDEX NO.: 1133WOO
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, improperly impleaded as DB Riley, Inc.
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation
costs.
WEITZ & Frank Ortiz, Esq.
ERSON, McNEILL, P Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway, gth Fl. New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for Riley Stoker Corporation 233 Broadway New York, New York 10279
(212) 558-5500 (2 12) 227-7878
SO ORDERED: r Hon. Sherry Kl-itler
A T
c - 1
s rhis Document Relates To:
MARY LAMBRUSCHI, as Executrix for the 3state of REGINALD J. LAMBRUSCHI, and MARY LAMBRUSCHI as Spouse, COMPANY
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION ON
BEHALF OF FORD MOTOR
Index No.: 115767/00 Plaintiff(s), :
-against-
4.P. GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC., et al.,
WHEREFORE, defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs zomplaint against defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDEMD, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross-claims against defendant, FORD MOTOR COMPANY, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York April 16,2010
FEINSTEIN & 360 Lexington Ave. DEUTSCH, LLP New York, New York 10017 Attorneys for MARY LAMBRUSCHI as Executrix for the Estate of REGINALD J. LAMBRUSCHI and MARY LAMBRUSCHI as
Attorneys for Defendant Ford Motor Company 757 Third Avenue New York, New
Spouse T: 2 12-593-6700 F: 212-593-6970
APR 3 2010 4
(00859198.DOC 100842682
s
lOUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
ANGEL0 RUNCO AND FELICETTA RUNCO,
a".
PLAINTIFF(S),
vs. AC AND S, INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY), et al.,
DEFENDANTS.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
INDEX NO.: 115822/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, DB Riley, Inc., requests summary judgment in the above-entitled
case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff's complaint agains
defendant, DR Riley, Inc., with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, DE3 Riley, Inc., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without costs.
F I L E D
ON, McNEILL, P.C. Giovanni #gins, gsq. WATERS, b&JHl?RSON, McNEILL, P.C.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway 233 Broadway New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for DB Riley, Inc,
New York, New York 10279 (212) 558-5500 (212) 227-7878
SO ORDERED: €-Ion. Sherry Klein Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY ! NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION j I.A.S. Part 30 j (Heitler, J.)
j Index No.: 1 101 83/0 THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
IRVING BERNSTEIN AND IDA BERNSTEIN,
Plaintiffs, i NO OPPOSITION j SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- j MOTION AND ORDER
A. C. & S., INC., et al.
Defendants. ~
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 4 3212, dismissing plaintiffs’
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
F I L E D APR 3 0 2010
NEW YORK J C Q U ~ CLERKS 0FFK;F-
’ &l&Q -
t&&duL ‘q- Attorney for Defendant Attorney for Plaintiffs Treadwell Corporation MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
Irving Bernstein and Ida Bernstein WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
n A
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
j : , : ,.i 3 Ll 201Q 1235-480
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY i NYCAL
j I.A.S. Part 30 i (Heitler, J.)
i Index No.: 118681/0O
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
ELAINE SPARACINO, as Executrix for the Estate of ATHANASIO ORESTIS and CARMEN ORESTIS, Individually, i NO OPPOSITION
j SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiffs, i MOTION AND ORDER
-against-
A. C. & S., INC., et al.
Defendants. i
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing plaintiffs’
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New Y rk New York q % 4 ,2010
Treadwell Corporation
80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004
MCGIVNEY & mUGER, P.C.
(212) 509-3456
Estate of Athanasio Orestis and Carmen Orestis
700 Broadway NewYork,NewYorkfba L E D WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C.
(212) 558-5500
APR 3 0 2010
NEW YORK So ORDERED,
Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler COUNTY CLERICS-
LiJJd 3 i) 2010 1235-2385
t -
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY _- -_____ l____r___ l___r_ l f__ l r___________- X
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Frank SchuIte
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
Index No: 106977/01 (l-Tf?-T*
, -
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., without costs.
Frank M. Ortiz, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims be and thesame are hereby
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 071 02-301 7 973 -624-0 800
I".
SO ORDERED, APR 3 0 2010 Hon. Sherry klei'n Heitler
959877. I
- - .-.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _____r - - - -_ l___"r - - -__________ l____ l____-
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
James McKenna (Dec.)
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30
(Heitler, S.) i
I0075803
WHEmFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 07 102-30 1 7
2 12-558-5500
973-624-0 8 00
904073.1
S U P E M E COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN F S NEW YORK CITY ______- -___ l_____ l l -___r___ l_____r______- X
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Russell A. Ndley
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
IndexN &G& 1 1 075 58/0 1 100 1 34/06
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY I
JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, JNC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York Ih\&J&z:P,-Ld10
; Frank M. Ortiz, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG VI Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500
SO ORDERED, e WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark, N e w p 4 bOeOD 973-624-0800
3 302010
959877. I
APR 3 0 2010
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 3 0 (Judge Heitler)
WHEREFORE, defendant Mario & DiBono Plastering CO, I n c , ,
hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section §3212, dismissing
plaintiffs' Complaint against defendant Mario & DiBono Plastering
CO. Inc., with prejudice, and there being no opposition there to , .-
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
Cross claims against defendant Mario & DiBono Plastering Co. I n c . ,
Index No. :
Plaintiffs, - against - NO OPPOSITION
SUMMARY JUDGMENT A . C . & S. Inc., et al., MOTION AND ORDER
Defendants. - -X
Dated: Brooklyn, New York , 2010
- kG I Esq. Weit z & Luxinberg, p . c . Attorneys for Plaintiffs Edward J. Reilly and Mary Reilly Inc. 700 Broadway, 6th Floor 177 Montague Street New York, New York 10003 Brooklyn, New York 11201
Attorneys for Defendant M a r i o & DiBono P l a s t e r i n g Co.
(718) 8 5 5 - 9 0 0 0 Our File No.: 10924-1271
SO Ordered: Hon. S h e r r Y K . Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY ! NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
FRANK H. HARVEY AND CATHERINE HARVEY,
j I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
i NO OPPOSITION
i MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, j SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against-
A, C, & S., INC., et al.
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 9 3212, dismissing plaintiffs’
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New ork, New York 3//& ,2010
F I L E D APR 3 0 2010
3
I
Ke ann ook,Esq. Attorney for Defendant Treadwell Corporation MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
Frank H. Harvey and Catherine Harvey WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
1235-2762
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
3 IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY
ASBESTOS LITIGATION ! NYCAL j I.A.S. Part 30 j (Heitler, J.)
j Index No.: 100788/01 THlS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
FRANK H. HARVEY and CATHERINE HARVEY, , , ,
i NO OPPOSITION
! MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, i SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against-
A. C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendants. j
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 9 3212, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
_.. ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against "-
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs,
Dated: New York, New York q\ 9 ,2010
MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 180 Maiden Lane New York, New York 10038
(2 12) 509-3456 (2 12) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
APR 30 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW Y O N COUNTY OF NEW YORK
lN RE NEW YORK CITY ___r__C-__f - - -_ f -___r____lr r___r_______l - X
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Richard Clough
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, S.)
100754/03
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, XNC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York pQ!IQff&-&L, 10
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500
SO ORDERED,
WILSON, E S R, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, XNC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 07102-3017
ts 973-624-0800
949043.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK r -__ -__ l -__"________________ l__ l r__ l____-
JN RE NEW YOFX CITY x
NYCAL
(Heitler, S.)
Index No: 105913/01
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 39
X _ - _ _ - - _ d _ _ _ * - _ d - -
This Document Relates To:
Robert W. Coggins
T
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
-HEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismiss( without costs.
Dated: New York New York (LAc-f&7 is 2d\ 0
WEITZ & LUXENBERG WILSON@ESER, MOSKOWITZ, Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 1 2-558-5500
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 07 102-30 1 7 973 -624-0 800
959877.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK .."
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION MARIE QUIRK, Individually and as Personal Representative for the Estate of THOMAS A. QUIRK, Plain tiff(s),
A.C. and S., INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTMCTING & SUPPLY) ET AL. Defendants.
vs.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
1 INDEX NO,: 120434/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND
1 ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, improperly impleaded as DB Riley, Inc.
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without
F I L E D I
costs.
\ > Frank Ortiz, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway, 6'h F1. New York, New York 10003
WEITZ & L U X E N ~ G , P.
233 Broadway New York, New York 10279
(2 12) 558-5500 (2 12) 227-7878
SO ORDERED: Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ZOUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Index Nd$2-) I 1 8216198
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
JUNIA L. CROCKETT as the Executrix for the Estate of ROBERT N. CROCKETT and JUNIA L. CROCKETT, Individually
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., hereby requests summary
iudgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
against defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
DATED: 3 -31 ,2010
Attorneys for Plaintiff Weitz & Luxenberg 700 Broadway - 7th floor New York, NY 10003 Weiner Lesniak LLP ‘ 4 R Attorneys for Defend ant
Robert A. Keasbey Co.
888 Veterans Memorial i hway Hauppauge, NY 11788 @ 4
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION FRANCIS J. TABONE, as Administrator for the Estate of EMMANUEL TABONE, and ELIZABETH BRODSY, Individually, Plaintiff(s),
A.C. and S., INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) ET AL. Defendants.
vs.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
INDEX NO.: 120779/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, improperly impleaded as DB Riley, Inc.
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without
costs.
Frank Ortiz, Esq.
F I L E D
Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway, 6th F1. New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for Riley Stoker Corporation 233 Broadway New York, New York 10279
(212) 558-5500 (2 12) 227-7878
SO ORDERED: Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW Y O N COUNTY OF Nl3W YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
ELIZABETH BRODSKY, Individually and as Proposed Executrix for the Estate of EMMANUEL TABONE,
Plaintiffs,
-against-
A. C. & S., INC., etal.
Defendants.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No.: 120779/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Ij 3212, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
-dice and
Treadwell Corporation MCGTVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004
Elizabeth Brodsky and Estate of Emmanuel Tabone WEITZ & LUXENBEKG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
ABR 3 0 2010 Hon, Sherry Klein Heitler
1235-2416
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RF, NEW Y O N CITY X _ _ _ _ _ l r - - _ _ " " _ _ ~ " ~ _ - _ - - 1 - r - - 1 - - - - - l l r - - - - ~ ~ - - - - ~ " ~ ~ - ~ ~
ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, S.)
c , -
Index No: 1121
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X I " - - -
John M. Mallon
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, TNC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all ross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are without costs. .f
Dated: New York, New York hI.&d 2"" 3 Zbb
/3zLkz Z4&> Matthew Maclntyre, E&. WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500 33 Washington Street
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
OAKFABCO, INC.
Newark, New Jersey 07 102-30 17 973 -624-0 800
.:" g? 3 0 2010
904073. I
SLTPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY i NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION j I.A.S.Part30 ! (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: Index No.: 121569/00
WILLIAM DOWNS,
Plaintiffs, i NO OPPOSITION j SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against- i MOTION AND ORDER
A. C. & S,, INC., et al.
Defendants. !
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 8 3212, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New Yor , New York 3 I;-i ,2010
ok, Esq.
Treadwell Corporation William Downs MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
_ - 1235-21955
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
II
- -
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION NELDA KLINE, as Executrix for the Estate of SIDNEY P. KLINE and NELDA KLINE, Individually, Plaintiff(s),
A.C. and S., INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) ET AL. Defendants.
vs.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
INDEX NO.: 122594/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, improperly impleaded as DE Riley, Inc.
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without
costs. F I L E D
ERSON, McNEILL, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway, gfh F1. New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for Riley Stoker Corporation 233 Broadway New York, New York 10279
(212) 558-5500 (2 12) 227-7878
SO ORDERED: - - Hen. Sherry Kleinwitler
I' PR 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION PATRICIA VENEZIANO, as Executrix for the Estate of RONALD P. McENTYRE, and PATRICIA VENEZIANO, as Executrix for the Estate of EDNAMAE McENTYRE, Plaintiff(s),
A.C. and S., INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) ET AL. Defendants.
vs.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
INDEX NO.: 123224/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, improperly impleaded as DB Riley, Inc.
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, be and the same are hereby d i s r n i s s e v l qelu costs.
WEITZ & LUXENBER Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway, 6th F1. New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for Riley Stoker Corporation 233 Broadway New York, New York 10279
(212) 558-5500 (21 2) 227-7878
SO ORDERED: Hon. Sherry Kleinweitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK TN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY j NYCAL -_ , - -. .
ASBESTOS LITIGATION i I.A.S. Part 30 ! (Heitler, 5.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: j Index No.: 123777/00
BEATRICE SHEA, Individually and Executrix for j the Estate of FREDERICK AMES,
i NO OPPOSITION
i MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, j SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against-
A. C. & S., INC., et al.
Defendants. i
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3212, dismissing plaintiffs’
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New Y rk, New York 3 p.. ,2010 F I L E D APR 3 o ma
CF
Treadwell Corporation MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004
Beatrice Shea and Estate of Frederick Ames WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDEWD,
wri 3 0 2010 1235-1192
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY _ f - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l _ " l _ _ _ _ _ - - I - r r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Alan Edward Pauze
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
Index No: 113354/99 c - 7 NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT ! MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs. ".. Dated:
Adam J. Kipds, Esq. 1 WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
OAKFABCO, JNC.
Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500 33 Washington Street
Hon. Sherry ein Heitler SO ORDERED,
959877. I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY r r________ l_____"____ l l___ l____ l_____r__- X
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Marjorie Ann Pauze, as Administratrix for the Estate of Alan Edward Pauze, and Marjorie Ann Pauze, Individually
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 1133 99 e 243 3 9/00
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER I I
_ _ _ - - - _ " r - _ _ " _ - _ _ _ l _ _ _ _ _ _ r _ _ _ _ _ _ l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - X
WHEREFORE, defendant A. W. CHESTERTON COMPANY hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant A. W. CHESTERTON COMPANY with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
I
.-
Danny Kraft, Esq. Weitz & Luxenberg, PC Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, N.Y., 10003
SO ORDERED, fi Hon. Sherr K. eitler
3885749. I
l . \ ( d i ( 3 ir 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X - _ _ _ _ " _ - - - _ _ _ - l l - _ _ l - - - - - - - - l - - - " - " - - - - - - - -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S,)
Index No: 124526/00
Frank S. Hitchcock NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X -1 - - " - - - - -1 - - -_ - - - - -1________1_1______1_-
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York New York h f C h 52' zcl IO
WEITZ & LUXENBERG 3 0 1''' WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
Newark, New Jersey 07 102-30 1 7 973-624-0800
2 12-558-5500
APR 3 u 2010
959877.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 EDWARD MAZUR, JR. and BARBARA A. MAZUR,
NYCAL
(HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
INDEXNO.: 10 1251 32/00
ADIENCE, INC., ET AL. a NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, improperly impleaded as DB Riley, Inc.
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendslnts, all claims andcross claims against
defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without
costs.
A
F \ L E D APR 3 o ma
Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway, 6th F1. New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for Riley Stoker Corporation 233 Broadway New York, New York 10279
(212) 558-5500 (2 12) 227-7878
SO ORDERED:
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW Y O N COUNTY j NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
FRANK €3. HARVEY AND CATHERINE HARVEY,
j I.A.S. Part 30 j (Heitler, 1.)
i Index No.: 119391/00 100781/01 a i NO OPPOSITION
i MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, j SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against-
A. C. & S., INC., et al.
Defendants, i
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing plaintiffs’
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claim?. against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
,2010 APR 3 0 2010
Treadwell Corporation MCG~VNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
Frank H. Harvey and Catherine Harvey WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon.’Shehy Kyein Heitler
12352162
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY i NYCAL
j I . A S Part 30 i (Heitler, J.)
j Index No . 100788/01 119391/00
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
FRANK H. HARVEY and CATHERINE HARVEY, a
\ NO OPPOSITION
j MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, j SUMMARY JUDGMENT
-against-
A. C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendants. i
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules $ 3212, dismissing plaintiffs'
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation, with prejudice in this action, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York 3\\ "\ ,2010
APR 3 0 2pa
-&?&-- EwvoRK
'$-ccanL ut Attorney for Plainti Frank H. Harvey a WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. 1 SO Maiden Lane New York, New York I 0038
MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (2 12) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
APR 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION JOANN KAZAKWIC, as Personal Representative for the Estate of CHARLES A. KAZAKWIC, JR. and JOANN KAZAKWIC, Individually, Plaintiff(s),
A.C. and S., INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) ET AL. Defendants.
VS,
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
INDEX NO.: 101913/01
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, improperly impleaded as DB Riley, Inc.
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without
costs,
Frank Ortiz, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBE&&& Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway, Bth Fl. New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
Attorneys forkdef Stoker Corporation 233 Broadway New York, New York 10279 (21 2) 227-7878
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK :OUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION MARGARET A. JOYCE, as Executrix for the Estate of HAROLD L. JOYCE, and MARGARET A. JOYCE, Individually, Plaintiff(s),
A.C. and S., INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) ET AL. Defendants.
vs.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
INDEX NO.: 101925/01
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, improperly impleaded as DB Riley, Inc.
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without
costs.
Frank Ortiz, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway, 6'h F1. New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
F I L E D APR 3 o ma I n
RSON, McNEILL, P.C. Stoker Corporation
233 Broadway New York, New York 10279 (2 12) 227-7878
SO ORDERED: Hon. Sherry KleivHeitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 ; (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
CAROL M. ABRAMSKI, INDIVIDUALLY AND I
AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF ALEXANDER ABRAMSKI, I NO OPPOSITION
Index No.: 102567/01 I
I I
; SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
I
Plaintiff( s)
-against- I I I I I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant(s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Patterson Pump Company, hereby requests summaq judgment
in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing plaintiff's
complaint against defendant, Patterson Pump Company with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Patterson Pump Company, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
F I L E D APR 3 0 2010
Attorneys for Defendants Patterson Pump Company 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Estate of Alexander Abramski 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(2 12) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500 . ,
454-0375
SO ORDERED,
N0000737-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY : NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
CAROL M. ABRAMSKI, INDIVIDUALLY AND I
AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF ALEXANDER ABRAMSKI, ! NO OPPOSITION
! Index No.: 102567/01 I
I I
Plaintiff(s) ; SUMMARY JUDGMENT
MOTION AND ORDER I I I
I I I I I
"against- I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant(s). I I
4. - -
WHEREFORE, defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation with prejudice, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, be and the same are hereby i ed with prejudice
and without costs. p h . E ~ Dated: Mew YoLk, New York u+w, 4 ,2010
r r
Attorneys for Defendants Tishman Liquidating Corporation 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Estate of Alexander Abramski 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(212) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
N0000742-1 A P R 302010
2383-22513
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
I THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
CAROL M. ABRAMSKI, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF ALEXANDER ABRAMSKI, I NO OPPOSITION
Plaintiff( s)
I Index No.: 102567/01
I I
I I
I I I I I
-against- I
A.C. & S., NC., et al.,
Defendads). I
SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, hereby requests s u m m q
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 8 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation with prejudice, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice
and without costs.
APR 3 0 2014
Attorneys for Defendants Tishman Liquidating Corporation 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Estate of Alexander Abramski 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(2 12) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
2383-22513
N0000742- I , APR 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW Y O N COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION ! I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I : Index No.: 102567/01 CAROL M. ABRAMSKI, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF ALEXANDER ABRAMSKI, I NO OPPOSITION
I I
Plaintiff(s) : SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
I
I I I I I I '
-against- I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant( s) . I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company, be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New ;York, New York
M c & W KLUGER, P.C. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Estate of Alexender Abramski 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(2 12) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
324-5991
APR 3 0 2010 N0000732-1
-. . . -. . . ..
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _ _ l _ l - - - - - _ l l " - - - _ _ _ I - - - l - t r - - - - - - - - - - " - - - - - - - - -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, S.)
James McRenna (Dec.)
Index No: I 1938000 - 10075803
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X - - -
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC,, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New Y
WEI rz & LUXENBERG EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC.
Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 212-558-5500
h
33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 07 102-30 17 973-624-0800
904073. I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ALL COUNTIES WITHIN NEW YORK CITY _________________- I_____________ I____ -X NYCAL IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I.A.S. Part 30
ASBESTOS LITIGATION (Judge Heitler) -X _ _ - - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
This Document Relates to: Henry Stude and Enza Stude, Index No.: 104980/01
Plaintiffs, - against - NO OPPOSITION
j SUMMARY JUDGMENT A.C. & S. Inc., et al., MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Burnham LLC, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law
and Rules Section § 3 2 1 2 , dismissing plaintiffs' Complaint against
defendant Burnham LLC, with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
cross claims against defendant Burnham LLC, be dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
Dated: Brooklyn, New York qlr b
fiw'IL.h4 p*+17 w. ..., , E a q . Weitz & Luxenberg, P.C. Cullen and Dykman LLP Attorneys f o r Plaintiffs Attorneys f o r Defendant Henry Stude and E n z a Stude B u r n h a m LLC 700 Broadway, 6th Floor 177 Montague Street New York, New York 10003 Brooklyn, New
(718) 855-9000 Our File No.: 1108
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YOFX CITY _"___--_____l__________lr l______l l l_____- X
NYCAL ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30
WHEREFORE, defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto, \\
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, a1 against defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, be and the s with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
I &(&rl r,
dL &cv% Danny Kraft, Esq, Weitz & Luxenberg, PC Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, N.Y., 10003
New York, New York 100 17 Our File. Number: 05335.00001
SO ORDERED,
3892928,l
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X _____l______ll_______ll______________l__-
ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S . )
Index No cicE> 1 19398/00
Robert W. Coggins NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all eo-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same ar without costs.
Dated: New York, New York w 2 2C)m
Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 2 1 2-5 5 8-5 500
OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 07 1 02-30 1 7 973-624-0800
\
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
959877.1
SUPFLEME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY l " _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ " _ _ _ _ _ c _ _ _ I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ " X
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Richard Clough
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, S.)
100754/03
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendan1 OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated:. New York, New York /k!?*.r&k. &?- , /o
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500
SO ORDERED,
MOSKOWITZ,
OAKFABCO, XNC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 07 102-30 17 973-624-0800
949043.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X ______ l_*____ l______L____r r___________ l_ -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Albert Anthony Rahey
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, S.)
Index No: 106459/01
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
I
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
n )+f
Joseph W i l l i e 4 . k WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500
SO ORDERED, *+- Hon. Sherry K ein Heitler
APR 3 2010
WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street ',
958753.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
N RE NEW YORK CITY X _ - _ l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l l _ _ _ l r _ _ _ - - - - - r - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Vito Pietanza and Raffaella Pietanza
" .I "
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 100 2/03 A, W
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X . * l . . - - - -*- l
WHEREFORE, defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Danny ha f t , Esq. Weitz & Luxenberg, PC Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, N.Y., 10003
Our File Number: 05335.00001
_.-
SO ORDERED,
3886296.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - I I _ _ _ _ _ l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l _ _ _ - X
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Frank Schulte
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
1 19379/00 100779/03
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there i being no opposition thereto, I
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., without costs.
w York, New ork Dated: &/& ,?d&
Frank M. Ortiz, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500
be and the same are hereby dismissed
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 07 1 02-30 1 7 973-624-0800
I 959877.1
.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ALL COUNTIES WITHIN NEW YORK CITY _- - - I___________________________I____ -X NYCAL IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I.A.S. P a r t 30
ASBESTOS LITIGATION (Judge Heitler) -X
This Document Relates to: Edward J. Reilly and Mary Reilly, Index No. :
Index No. :%-$ Plaintiffs,
- against - NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT
A.C. & S . Inc., et al., MOTION AND ORDER
Defendants. -X
WHEREFORE, defendant Mario EL DiBono Plastering Co. Inc.,
hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section S3212, dismissing
plaintiffs' Complaint against defendant Mario & DiBono Plastering
Co. I n c . , with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
cross claims against defendant Mario & DiBono Plastering Co. Inc.,
F I L E D I be dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: Brooklyn, New York
/
len arid Dylr - AW/-, Esq. Weitz & Luxenberg, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiffs Attorneys f o r Defendant Edward J. Reilly and M a r y M a r i o & DiBono P l a s t e r i n g Co. Reilly Inc. 700 Broadway, 6th Floor 177 Montague Street New York, New York 10003 Brooklyn, New York 11201
(718) 8 5 5 - 9 0 0 0 Our File No.: 10924-1271
-. .
So Ordered: Hon. SherwK. Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY - I - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - X
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Russell A. Ridley
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claim and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, ** INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York (hl&,&2;3,-2d)u
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500
WILSON, ELSER, MOSROWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark, N e w p 4 bOE00 973-624-0800
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S . )
959877.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION RUSSELL A. RIDLEY and GLORIA PONIDEXTES, Plaintiff(s),
A.C. and S., INC. (ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) ET AL. Defendants.
vs.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER)
INDEX NO.: 107558/01
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, improperly impleaded as DB Riley, Inc.
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiff's complaint against defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Riley Stoker Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without
costs.
WEITZ & LUXENB Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway, 6th F1. New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
F I L E D
Stoker Corparation 233 Broadway New York, New York 10279 (2 12) 227-7878
SO ORDERED:
1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY : NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION : I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.)
I Index No.: 108005/01 THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
LORRAINE ROBINSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF DANIEL I ROBINSON, I NO OPPOSITION
SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff(s) MOTION AND ORDER
I
-against-
A.C. & S., INC., et al., I
Defendant(s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., hereby requests summary judgment
in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Courter & Company, Inc. with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., be and the same are hereby d is rn issekik & e e b d
without costs. APF3 3 0 2010
Dated: New rk New York T p ,2010
Attorneys for Defendants Courter & Company, Inc. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.c.. Attorneys for Plaintiff Estate of Daniel Robinson 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
1122-19771
N0001434-1 APR 3 0 2010
i i I
i
.. ‘ I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION ; J.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
: Index No.: 108005/01 LORRAINE ROBINSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND : AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF DANIEL I ROBINSON, I NO OPPOSITION
SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiff(s)
I
“against-
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
I I I I I I I I
Defendads). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Treadwell Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 0 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Treadwell Corporation with prejudice, and there being no opposition
thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Treadwell Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York 4/ 4 ‘ ,2010
M ~ Y & KLUGER, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Treadwell Corporation 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Estate of Daniel Robinson 700 Broadway New York, New York 10 E I L E D
(2 12) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500 APR 3 0 201@
NEW YORK COUNTY C%flk$&-
SO ORDERED,
NO00 I 374- 1 APR 3 0 2818
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I I NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.)
I Index No.: 108005/01 I I
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
LORRAINE ROBINSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF DANIEL ROBINSON, I NO OPPOSITION
SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff( s) MOTION AND ORDER
I
-against-
A,C. & S,, INC., et al.,
I I I I I I I I
Defendant(s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 0 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation with prejudice, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Tishman Liquidating Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
Dated: N q i v, New York ,20 1 0
9 p o k , Esq. :Y & KLUGER, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendants Tishman Liquidating Corporation SO Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff Estate of Daniel Robinson
i 700 Broadway ~ e w York, New York 10003 F 1 L E D ,
(212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherrv Klein E
bpR 3 0 zolo SO ORDERED,
Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
NO001 433-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY : NYCAL
I I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.)
I Index No.: 108005/0 1
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I
I I
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
LORRAINE ROBINSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX FOR THE ESTATE OF DANIEL
I NO OPPOSITION ROBINSON, I I SUMMARY JUDGMENT I MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiff( s)
-against-
A.C. & S., INC., et al., I
Defendant(sl I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co., hereby requests summary
3212, dismissing judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. with prejudice, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Safeguard Industrial same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
A a Dated: New York, New York
! i I
I
Attorneys for Defendants Safeguard Industrial Equipment Co. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Estate of Daniel Robinson 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(2 12) 509-3456 (2 12) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
324-6190
536.07146/AJM SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
This document relates to:
JAMES McGEE, Deceased,
Plaintiff,
vs .
UNITED CONVEYOR CORPORATION, et al. ,
Defendants.
YORK
NYCAL IAS PART 30 (Honorable Sherry Klein Heitler)
Index No, : 110498/01
(May 2010 Monthly FIFO Trial Group)
NO OPPOSITION SuMMaRY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, hereby
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff's
Complaint against defendant, United Conveyor Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and
crossclaims against defendant, United Conveyor Cor+o#Rion, be and the
FRANK M. ORTIZ, E S 0 . d STEPREN F.
Attorneys f o r Plaintiff & FLINN 700 Broadway Attorneys for Defendant, New York, New York 10003 United Conveyor Corporation
72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P.O. Box 438 East Hanover, New Jersey 07936
-. SO ORDERED,
Honorable gheryy Klein Heitler
APR 3 0 2010
' SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL COUNTYOFNEWYORK
ASBESTOS LITIGATION : I.A.S, Part 30
3
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
(Heitler, J.) THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
RAYMOND PFLIEGLER, I I
Plaintiff(s) I
I I NO OPPOSITION
: MOTION AND ORDER -against- I SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I I I I
I Defendant( s) . I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 0 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company, be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs. FI LE-IF Dated: New York, New York
,20 10
Attorneys for Defendants Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Attorneys for Plaintiff Raymond Pfliegler 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
(2 12) 509-3456 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon. Shehy Klein Heitler
324-5985AK
N0000175-1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
Index No.: 11 1867/01 In Re: NEW YORK CITYASBESTOS LITIGATION
NICHOLAS DELFINO, Plaintiff(s),
- against -
AC and S , INC., (ARMSGTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) et al.,
Defendants.
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT
MOTION
WHEREFORE, Defendant WEIL-MCLAIN COMPANY, INC., hereinafter (“WEIL-
MCLAIN”) hereby requests Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff’s complaint against Defendant Weil-
McLain with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant, Weil-McLain be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs
to either party.
Dated: t4AwJ-i 50 , 2010 New York New York ZE7- (&/f@ ~
& h \ k Jennife dner, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorneys for Defendant New York, NY 10003
SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY, LTD.
(212) 558-5500 Weil-McLain 830 Third Avenue, Suite
New York, NY 10022 1 L E D
(212) 651-7500 APR 3 0 2010
NEW YORK SO ORDERED, COUNN CLERK‘S OFFIW
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No.: 11 1229/01 119620/01 D THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
RAYMOND PFLIEGLER, I
Plaintiff(s) I I
' NO OPPOSITION
! MOTION AND ORDER I
-against- SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I
I I
A.C. & S., INC., et al.,
Defendant(s). I I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 8 3212,
dismissing plaintiff's complaint against defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company, be -and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York ,20 10
MCGM K L U ~ E R , P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Safeguard Industrial Equipment Company 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
F 1 LE'D APR 3 o zoia
/ Attorneys for Plaintiff Raymond Pfliegler 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, Hon, She&y Klein Heitler
324-5985AK
NODOO175-1
This Document Relates To:
JACK E. DONALDSON, SR (DEC)
NO OPPQSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT M m 0
WETEREPORE, Defendant, American Financial Group, h c . (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant9') hereby requests summary judgment in the elbove-entitled case, pwsuant to CPLR $ 3212, dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint against Defendant, Anadcan Financial Group, Inc., with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDEFUTD, that upon Notice to all Co-Defendants, all Clahns and Cross-claims against Defendants, American Finamid Group, Inc., ba and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and witbut costs.
April 12,2010 Dated: -ti ew York, New Yark
&M W I T Z & LUXENBERG HODGSON RUSS, LLP
lL /fL~w:d.dl\ Micbasl Fanelli, Esquire
AlWrneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
Alan Muraidekh, Esquire Attorneys far Defendant American Financial Graup, Inc.
60 East 42" Street New Yark, NOW York 101
A M 38 t@M J.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
G W T E D :
' I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Thomas J, Cruger, Sr.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
10522 1-98 11 1031-98 102783-00
WHEREFORE, defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co., hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co,, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all defendant ERICSSON INC., as successor in inter the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and w
Dated: New York, New York
Weitz & Luxenberg, P.C. Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 ERICSSON INC., as
successor in interest to Anaconda Wire & Cable Co. 150 East 42"d Street New York, New York 10017
Our File No. 07536.08563 2 1 2-490-3000
APR 3 0 2010 SO ORDERED,
39491 75.1
Apr 14 10 10:27a
-against-
A.F. SUPPLY CORPORATION; et al
NYCAL I.A,S. Part 30 (Judge Heitler) ,
Index No.: 11654342
KO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGEMENT MOTION AND ORDER RE: FEBRUARY 2010 FIFO
shia BROOKLYN PLUMBING & HEATING, hereby request summary judgement in the above-entitled
case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs' coinplaint against
defendant BROOKLYN PLUMBING & HEATING SUPPLY CORPORATION s/h/a BROOKLYN
PLUMBING & HEATING, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDEED, that upon notice to all co-defendants all claims and cross claims against defendant
BROOKLYN PLlJ'MElJNG & HEATlNG SUPPLY CORPORATION dh/a BROOKLYN PLU
HEATING, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: Albertson New York April A, 2010
Attorney for Plaintiff 360 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10017
G & HEATING
BROOKLYN PLUMBING & HEATDIG 200 I.U. WiItets Road Albertsm, New York 1 1507 5 16) 53 5-5433
File No.: CNZZV1711N2 JAE
SO ORDERED,
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I NYCAL I
ASBESTOS LITIGATION : I.A.S. Part 30 I (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: I
EUGENE OBRIEN AND JANE O’BRIEN, I 10486 1 /97 I
I Plaintiff( s) I
NO OPPOSITION -against- : SUMMARY JUDGMENT
A.C. & S,, INC, et al., : MOTION AND ORDER
Defendant(s). I I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., hereby requests summary judgment
in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules (j 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Courter & Company, Inc. with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Courter & Company, Inc., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New Yprk, New York YIP ,2010
c
Attorneys for Defendants Courter & Company, lnc. 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (2 12) 509-3456
Attorneys for Plaintiff Eugene O’Brien and Jane O’Brien 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
11 22-3047
NO001 062-1
WHEREFORE, defendant COLUMBIA BOILERS hereby requests summary judgment in the
above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant COLUMBIA BOILERS, with prejudice, and there being no opposition
thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant
COLUMBIA BOILERS, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York April 5,2010
LEVY, PHILLIPS & KONIGSBERG, LLP FELDMAN ~ E F F E R , LLP 800 Third Avenue, 13' Floor
New York, NY 10022 110 Pearl Street, Suite 4 Buffalo, New York 1420
!
001 56872. WPD AQR 3 0 2010
ORIGINAL SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY X _______________1_1_111_1________________-----------------------
ASBESTOS LITIGATION X _____________________I__________________-----------------------
This Document Relates To:
DIANE S. STONITSCH, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of GEORGE J. STONITSCH, JR., Deceased,
Plaintiff,
-against-
ARVINMERITOR, INC., et al., Including, MAREMONT CORPORATION,
Defendants .
Index No. 121949/02
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Maremont Corporation hereby requests summary judgment in
the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing
plaintiff's complaint against defendant Maremont Corporation with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
m
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims '&tinst
defendant Maremont Corporation be and the same
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York April -7 21 2010
1
Peggy L. Pan, Esq. KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES &
Attorneys for Defendant 1633 Broadway New Y ork, New York 1 00 1 9
Attorneys for Plaintif FRIEDMAN LLP 747 Third Avenue New York, NY 100 17 (866) 298-9934
SO ORDERED, (212) 506-1700
m Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler (2-T 3 0 2010
SUPFSME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORJS COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
James McKenna (Dec.)
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, S.)
Index No: 11938000
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFOREy defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC.
Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 212-558-5500 33 Washington Street
Newark, New Jersey 071 02-301 7 973-624-0800
SO ORZ)ERED, f
Hon. Sherry Kkin Heitler ' jf,t" D b \ 3 Q aQ\Q
904073.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ___r___l_______f l_______l_____r___l____l - X
IN RE NEW YORK CITY NYCAL
(Heitler, S.) ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30
-. ,
Richard Clough
Index No: 119398/00 10591 5/01
<Oi%ET>
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff's complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York. New York 10003 2 12-558-5 500
OAKFABCO, NC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 071 02-30 17 973-624-0800
949043.1
3
! I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY l " _ - _ _ _ _ l _ _ _ _ _ _ l _ _ _ _ _ - - - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " - - - X
NYCAL
(Heitler, S.)
Index No: 106977/01 1 19379/00
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 39
X _ _ _ _ _ I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ f _ _ _ -
This Document Relates To:
Frank Schulte -my
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
__r_-_____________lr_____lr_____lr r___l_- X
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and &ere being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, ING., without costs.
Frank M. Ortiz, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG 'q Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 2 12-558-5500
be and the same
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 07102-301 7 973-624-0800
*-. Hon. Sherry lein Heitler APR 3 0 2010 SO ORDERED,
959877.1
I I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X ________"__"_____ l__ l_ l___r r____________-
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Vito Pietanza and Raffaella Pietanza
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER I
WHEREFORE, defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Danny Kraft, Esq. Weitz & Luxenberg, PC Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadwav New York, N:Y., 10003 fl 150 E a s w e t
New Yor ew York 10017 Our File Number: 05335.00001
3886296.1 APR 3 t~ 2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW Y O N CITY X _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ " _ _ r r r - - _ _ _ _ r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r _ -
ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
Albert Pallamollo
Index No: 122203/99
L-3 NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
X
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby .- dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
OAKFABCO, INC.
Newark, New Jersey 07 1 02-3 0 1 7
700 Broadway Attorney for Defendant New York, New York 10003 212-558-5500 33 Washington Street
973 -624-0 800
SO ORDERED,
APR 3 0 2010
959877.1
SUPWME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YOFX
IN RE NEW Y O N CITY ______ l______ l____________r_____ l l l_____- X
ASBESTOS LITIGATION NYCAL I.A.S. Part 39 (Heitler, S.)
Russell A. Ridley
Index No: 1 193&4/00 I
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT I
MOTION AND I
ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed .- with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York ( h i w &'2?,,X 10
WEITZ & LUXENBERG Attorney for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 2 1 2-5 5 8-5 5 00
WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark, N e w P 4 &OEOo 973-624-0800
959877.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK CclUNTY OF NEW YORK M RE: NEW YORK COUNTY i NYCAt
ASBESTOS LJTICiATION i I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitla, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: !
i IndexNo.: 105719/06 i
i SUMMARYJUDGMENT
LAWRENCE LJBROCQ wnd MARE LEBROCQ, : I
PlaintifFs, i NO OPPOSITION
-@rlst- i -ON AND OWER
A & M WHOLESALE HARDWARE CO., et al.
Def-.
I
I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Gem= Inmrporated, hereby quests summary judgmkt in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 0 32.12, dismissing plaintifk’
complaint against defendant, &msa Incorporated, with prejudice in thia action, and them being
no opposition t.heW,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all codehdants, all claim and cross clairru against
defendtmt, Gema Incorpolwted, be and the same are hemby dismissed with pjjudice and
without costs.
Dated: ew o NewYork p 7 ,2010
I
Gerosa Incorporatad MCGIVNEY & KLUcIER, P.C. 80 Broad Stre8-Suh 2300 New Yo* New York 10004 (212) 509-3456 (212) 267-3091
WILm& GOLDMAN & S P r I z q P.C. 110 William Stmet, 26th Floor New York, New Yo& 10038
SO ORDERED,
NOW24204
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I I.A.S. Part 30 i (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMlENT REFERS TO: I
! Index No.: 105719/06 j
Plaintiffs, i NO OPPOSITION
LAWRENCE LEBROCQ and MARIE LEBROCQ, I
/ SUMMARY JUDGMENT -against- i MOTION AND ORDER
A & M WHOLESALE HARDWARE CO., et uZ.
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, defendant, Gemsa Incorporated, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law atzd Rules 0 3212, dismissing plahtiffs’
complaint against defendant, Gerosa Incorporated, with prejudice in this action, and there Wig
no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Gerosa Incorporated, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
Dated: New York New York 4 / ! 9 ’ ,2010
Gerosa Incorporated MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P,C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
0
Lawrence LeBmcq and Marie LeBrocq WILENTZ, GOLDMAN & SPITZER, P.C. 1 10 William Street, 26th Floor New York, New York 10038 (2 12) 267-309 1
SO ORDERFD,
PR 3 0 2010 NOW2620- I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW Y O N COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
I 1.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I I
THIS DOCUMENT MFERS TO:
GEORGE ROUTHIER AND VERONICA I
ROUTHIER NO OPPOSITION
1 Index No.: 1 15679/06 I I
I SUMMARY JUDGMENT I MOTION AND ORDER
Plaintiff(s) I
-against- I I I I I I I
BEAZER EAST INC., et al.,
Defendant(s). I
WHEEFORE, defendant, Gerosa Incorporated, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 6 3212, dismissing plaintiff's
complaint against defendant, Gerosa Incorporated with prejudice, and there being no opposition
thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against I
defendant, Gerosa Incorporated be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without
costs.
Dated: New York, New York 4/17 ,2010 ApR 3 0 2010
P.C. w t b71k,L~%4d- , Attorneys for Defendants Attorneys for Plaintiff S f ; / . Gerosa Incorporated 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
George Routhier and Veronica Routhier 110 William Street New York, New York 10038
(2 12) 509-3456
SO ORDERED,
A H 3 0 2010 344-0461
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW Y O U COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY I I NYCAL,
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I I.A.S. Part dv
(Heitler, J.) I I
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
GEORGE ROUTHIER AND VERONICA I
ROUTHIER NO OPPOSITION
I Index No.: 1 15679/06 I I
Plaintiqs) I SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
-against- I I
BEAZER EAST INC., et al.,
Defendant(s). I 4
WHEREFORE, defendant, Gerosa Incorporated, hereby requests summary judgment in
the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules $3212, dismissing plaintiff’s
complaint against defendant, Gerosa Incorporated with prejudice, and there being no opposition
thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Gerosa Incorpomted be and the m e are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without
costs.
Dated: New Y k, New York @p-L 9 ,2010 ** Y & KLUGER, P.C.
3 0 2010 i
I
Attorneys for Plaintiff George Routhier and Veronica Routhier 1 10 William Street New Yo&, New York 10038
Attorneys for Defendants Gerosa Incorporated SO Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004
Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler f l o 9 1 3
(212) 509-3456
SO ORDERED,
2 ( tg 3 0 2010 461
... 3 . .-
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATlON
I.
.. ROBERT SHERNOWIZ AND CARLENE SHERNOWITZ
Plaintiffs,
New York hbestos Litigation (NYCAL)
Index No.: 107014108
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION
0IU)ER
-against-
NISSAN NORTH M I U C A , INC., el ab.,
WHEREFORE, defendant, NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, NC., hereby requests summary udgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to the Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212!
iismissing plaintiff's Complaint against defendant, NTSSAN NORTH M I I I C A , INC., with
irejudice, and there being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross-claims against
iefendant, NlSSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice md without costs.
L A W , Q'NEIL, RICCI, CEDRONE & DiSlPIO
merard Cedrone, Esq. 1
Leland 1. Kellner, Esq. Timothy J. McHugh, Esq.
Attorneys for Defendant
420 Lexington Avenue, Suite 2900 Graybar Building New York, New York 10 170
Our File No.: 6087-94860
New York, New York 10038 NlSSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., (212) 558-5500
(212) 319-6898
$0-ORDERED:
WHERI31~OIIE, IMcndant AMIXlCAN I311.'1*RI'I'E INC., and its wholly owned subsidiaries
(Iiercin rcf'errcd to as "AMERICAN HII,*TRI'I'E INC."), hereby requests Summary Judgmenl in the
abovc-cntitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Sections 32 12, dismissing plaintiff's'
complaint against Ilefendniit AMEIIICAN BILTlilTE INC,, with prejudicc, and there being 110
opposition thereto,
O I l ~ I l K E D , that upon noticc to all co-dcfcndanls, all claims and cross claims against Defendant,
AMERICAN l ~ l l d ' l ~ K I T I i INC., bc and the same are hereby dismissed with prcjudice and without costs to
either p r t y .
Ihtcd: Ncw York, Ncw York 2010
Atlunioys for Plaintiff 360 L,cxingtan Avenue, 20'" Floor NW York, Ncw Ytork IO0 I 7 ( 2 12) 986-2233
& MAIIONEY, 1,T'D. Attorneys for Defendant, American Uiltritc Inc., 830 Third Avenue, Suitc 400 Ncw York, New York 10022 (2 12) 65 1-7500
GEORGE J. RIBNICKY, JR., as Executor of the Estate of GEORGE J. RIBNICKY, SR.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
08/190021
NO OPPOSFITON SUMMARYJUDGEMENT M-QBPlEB
WHEREFORE, defendant FORENTA L.P. hereby requests summary judgment in the above
entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules $3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint qdnst
dsfendant FORENTA L.P., with prejudice in this action, and them being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all codefendants, all claims and cross claims against dafendant
FORENTA L.P., be and the Same we hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York Aprii 7.2010
Audrey P. Raphe, Esq. Aitwneyfor PIaints LEVY PHILLIPS t KONZGSBERG, U P 800 3" Ave. 13'FL
Richard L. Walker, Ekq. KELLY JASONS MCGUlRE & SPINELLI, LLP -0 Libnty PI., Suite 1900 50 south 16h smt
- Now York, NY I0022 Philadtlphia, PA 19102
SO ORDERED,
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ..................................................... "-~-~--....-~-
IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30
(Heitler, S.)
Index No.: 103352/09
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . This Document Relates to:
KENNETH ROBERT MORRILL and BONNIE MOFUULL JUDGMENT MOTION AND
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY
ORDER
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against Federal Pacific with prejudice, and there
being no opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant Federal Pacific be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without
costs.
Dated: New York New York &J ti; ,2010
Attorneys for Plaintiffs LEVY, PHILLIPS & KONISBERG, LLP 800 Third Avenue, 13'h Floor New York, New York 10022
88 Pine Street, 24'h Floor New York, Xew York 10005
SO ORDERED,
NOSJM-Revised (Morrill) (2).DOC
h
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
KENNETH ROBERT MORRILL and BONNIE MORRILL,
against
ADVANCE AUTO PARTS, INC., et al.,
1.A.S Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
INDEX NO.: 103352/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Frick Company incorrectly pled as York Process System - Frick, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice
Law and Rules Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, Frick Company
incorrectly pled as York Process System - Frick, with prejudice, and there being no opposition
thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Frlck Company incorrectly pled as York Process System - Frlck,
are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
DATED: P J w $ t r y i c k , NJ ,2010
ALLA gOSTINSKY, ESQ. HOAELAND, LONGO, MOWN DUNST & DOUKAS, LLP Attorneys for Defendant, Frick Company incorrectly pled as York Process System - Frick 40 Paterson Street - PO Box 480 New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903
SO ORDERED: -
APR 3 2010
PATR I C K q I MM I NS, ESQ . LEVY, PHILLIPS & KONIGSBERG, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff(s), Kenneth Robert Morrill and Bonnie Morrill 800 Third Ave, 13th Floor New York, NY 10022
fl Honorable Sherry Klein H itler
BP-PIG-27
- . I
Hoagland, Longo, Maran, Dunst 8, Daukas, LLP Attwrneys at Law
1501 Broadway Suite 1804 New York, NY
c AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
HELENA CAMPBELL, being duly sworn deposes and says I am an employee of Hoagland, Longo,
Moran, Dunst & Doukas, LLP, the attorneys for Defendant, Frick Company. L-
That on t h e d a y of April, 2010 a copy of the within No Opposition Motion for Summary Judgment
were mailed, via first class to: Patrick Timmins, Esq., Levy Phillips & Konigsberg, 800 Third Avenue, 13,
'loor, New York, NY and one copy to all defense counsel by first-class mail, postage prepaid.
I hereby certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the
yoregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.
SERVICE RIDER
Vancy McDonald, Esq. McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, LLP 1300 Mount Kemble Avenue '0 Box 2075 vlorristown, NJ 07962-2075
loseph P. LaSala, Esq. vIcElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, LLP I300 Mount Kemble Avenue '0 Box 2075 Viorristown, NJ 07962-2075
-die Evans, Esq. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker .50 East 42nd Street rJew York, NY 10017-5639
)avid P. Schaffer, Esq. vlalaby & Bradley, LLC 50 Broadway, Suite 600 rTew York. NY 10038
Villiam J. Bradley, Esq. dalaby & Bradley, LLC 50 Broadway, Suite 600 Jew York, NY 10038
oseph J. Ortego, Esq. Jixon Peabody, LLP
Hoagland, Longo, Moran, Dunst 8 Doukas , LLP Attorneys at Law
1501 Broadway Suite 1804 New York, NV
50 Jericho Quadrangle - Suite 300 Jericho, NY 11753-2728
Jason P. Sultzer, Esq. Littleton, Joyce, Ughetta, Park & Kelly, LLP The Centre at Purchase One Manhattanville Road, Suite 302 Purchase, NY 10577
Lisa M. Pascarella, Esq. Braaten & Pascarella LLC Paynter's Ridge Office Park 2430 Route 34 P.O. Box 648 Manasquan, NJ 08736
Thomas M. Beneventano, Esq. LaSorsa & Beneventano 3 Barker Avenue, #70 White Plains, NY 10601
Michelle D. Grady, Esq. McGivney & Kluger, PC 80 Broad Street, 23rd Floor New York, NY 10004
Anna M. DiLonardo, Esq. Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Hwy Suite 540 Hauppauge, NY 11788
Edward Wilbraham, Esq. Wilbraharn, Lawler & Buba 18 18 Market Street, Suite 3 100 Philadelphia, PA 19103
John J. Fanning, Esq. Cullen and Dykman, LLP 177 Montague Street Brooklyn, NY 11201
James B. Daniels, Esq. Budd Lamer, P.C. 150 John F. Kennedy Parkway CN 1000 Short Hills, NJ 07078-0999
Gordon Tresch, Esq. Feldman, Kieffer & Herman, LLP
Haagland, Longo, Moran, Dun& & Dnukas, LLP Attorneys at Law
1501 Broadway Suite 1804 New York, NV
The Dun Building 1 10 Pearl Street, Suite 400 Buffalo, NY 14202
Michael E. Waller, Esq. K&L Gates One Newark Center - Tenth Floor Newark, NJ 07102
Judith A. Yavitz, Esq. Reed Smith, LLP 599 Lexington Avenue, 22nd Floor New York, NY 10022
Robert J. Cecala, Esq. Aaronson Rappaport Feinstein & Deutsch, LLP 757 Third Avenue New York. NY 10017
Peter C. Langenus, Esq. Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis, LLP 140 Broadway, Suite 3 100 New York. NY 10005
Cynthia Weiss Antonucci, Esq. Harris Beach, LLP 100 Wall Street, 23rd Floor New York, NY 10005
John J. got, Esq. Waters, McPherson & McNeill 300 Lighting Way - 7th Floor PO Box 1560 Secaucus, NJ 07096
Renee Simon Lesser, Esq. Simon Lesser 420 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10170
David C, Weinberg, Esq. Segal, McCambridge, Singer & Mahoney, Ltd 830 Third Avenue, Suite 400 New York, NY 10022
Michael A, Tanenbaum, Esq. Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold, LLP 3 Gateway Center, 12th Floor Newark, NJ 07 102-53 1 1
Scott R. Emery, Esq.
Haagland, Langa, Moran, Dunst & Daukas, LLP Attorneys at Law
1501 Broadway Suite 1804 New York, NY
Lynch Daskal Emery, LLP 264 West 40th Street New York, NY 10018
Peter Stasz, Esq. H.B. Smith Company, Inc. 47 Westfield Industrial Park Rd. Westfield, MA 01085
Donald R. Pugliese, Esq. McDermott, Will & Emery 340 Madison Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10173-1922
Carol G. Snider, Esq. Damon & Morey, LLP Avant Building, Suite 1200 200 Delaware Ave Buffalo, NY 14202-2150
Suzanne Halbardier, Esq. Bany, McTiernan & Moore Two Rector Street, 14th Floor New York, NY 10006
Daniel McNamara, Esq. DeCicco, Gibbons & McNamara, P.C. 14 East 38th Street New York, NY 10016
Thomas Canevari, Esq. Freehill, Hogan & Mahar, LLP 80 Pine Street New York, NY 10005
Frederick D. Berkon, Esq. Leader & Berkon, LLP 630 Third Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10017
Rob C. Tonogbanua, Esq. Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. 41 South Haddon Avenue, Suite 5 Haddonfield, NJ 08033
Ruthe A. Nepf, Esq. Thompson Hine LLP 335 Madison Ave, 12th Floor
Hoagland, Longo, Moran, Dunst 8 Dgukas, LLP Attorneys at Law
1501 Broadway Sute 1804 New York, NY
John Ronca, Jr., Esq. Ronca, Hanley, Nolan & Zaremba, LLP Five South Regent Street, Suite 517 Livingston, NJ 07039
HOAGLAND, LONGO, MORAN, DUNST & DOUKAS, LLP Attorneys for t, Frick Company
Sworn to before me this /F - day of April, 20 10
! Y
1 -
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
KENNETH ROBERT MORRILL and BONNIE MORRILL,
against
ADVANCE AUTO PARTS. INC.. et al.,
I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
INDEX NO.: 103352/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, York International Corporation, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, York International Corporation, with prejudice,
and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, York International Corporation, be and the s a T k b &in with prejudice
and without costs.
DATED: ew Brunswick, NJ 9 ,2010
DUNST & DOUKAS, LLP Attorneys for Defendant, York International Corporation 40 Paterson Street - PO Box 480 New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903
Attorneys for Plaintiff(s), Kenneth Robert Morrill and Bonnie Morrill 800 Third Ave, 13th Floor New York, NY I0022
SO ORDERED: Honorable Sh&rry Klein Heitler
BP-PIG-28
Hoagland, Lrsngo, Moran, Dunst 8 Doukas, LLP Attarnays ai Law
1501 Braadwsy Suite 1804 New York, NV
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
HELENA CAMPBELL, being duly sworn deposes and says I am an employee of Hoagland, Longo,
Moran, Dunst & Doukas, LLP, the attorneys for Defendant, York International Corporation.
That on the d & o f April, 2010 a copy of the within No Opposition Motion for Summary Judgment
were mailed, via first class to: Patrick Timmins, Esq., Levy Phillips & Konigsberg, 800 Third Avenue, 13,
Floor, New York, NY and one copy to all defense counsel by first-class mail, postage prepaid.
I hereby certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the
Foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.
SERVICE RIDER
Nancy McDonald, Esq. McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, LLP 1300 Mount Kemble Avenue PO Box 2075 Morristown, NJ 07962-2075
loseph P. LaSala, Esq. McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, LLP 1300 Mount Kemble Avenue PO Box 2075 Morristown, NJ 07962-2075
lulie Evans, Esq. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker 150 East 42nd Street Yew York, NY 10017-5639
David P. Schaffer, Esq. Malaby & Bradley, LLC 150 Broadway, Suite 600 Vew York, NY 10038
William J. Bradley, Esq. Ualaby & Bradley, LLC 150 Broadway, Suite 600 Vew York, NY 10038
loseph J. Ortego, Esq. Vixon Peabody, LLP
Haagland, Langa, Moran, Dunst
Doukas, LLP Attorneys at Law
1501 Broadway S u k 1804 New York, NY
50 Jericho Quadrangle - Suite 300 Jericho, NY 11753-2728
Jason P. Sultzer, Esq. Littleton, Joyce, Ughetta, Park & Kelly, LLP The Centre at Purchase One Manhattanville Road, Suite 302 Purchase, NY 10577
Lisa M. Pascarella, Esq. Braaten & Pascarella LLC Paynter's Ridge Office Park 2430 Route 34 P.O. Box 648 Manasquan, NJ 08736
Thomas M. Beneventano, Esq. LaSorsa & Beneventano 3 Barker Avenue, #70 White Plains, NY 10601
Michelle D. Grady, Esq. McGivney & Kluger, PC 80 Broad Street, 23rd Floor New York, NY 10004
Anna M. DiLonardo, Esq. Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Hwy Suite 540 Hauppauge, NY 11788
Edward Wilbraham, Esq. Wilbraharn, Lawler & Buba 1818 Market Street, Suite 3100 Philadelphia, PA 1 9 103
John J. Fanning, Esq. Cullen and Dykman, LLP 177 Montague Street Brooklyn, NY 11201
James B. Daniels, Esq. Budd Lamer, P.C. 150 John F. Kennedy Parkway CN 1000 Short Hills, NJ 07078-0999
Gordon Tresch, Esq. Feldman, Kieffer & Herman, LLP
!
t-
Hoagland, Longo, Moran, Dunst 8 Doukas, LLP Attorneys at Law
1501 Broadway Suite I SO4 New York. NY
The Dun Building 1 10 Pearl Street, Suite 400 Buffalo, NY 14202
Michael E. Waller, Esq. K&L Gates One Newark Center - Tenth Floor Newark, NJ 07 102
Judith A. Yavitz, Esq. Reed Smith, LLP 599 Lexington Avenue, 22nd Floor New York, NY 10022
Robert J. Cecala, Esq. Aaronson Rappaport Feinstein & Deutsch, LLP 757 Third Avenue New York, NY 1001 7
Peter C. Langenus, Esq. Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis, LLP 140 Broadway, Suite 3100 New York, NY 10005
Cynthia Weiss Antonucci, Esq. Harris Beach, LLP 100 Wall Street, 23rd Floor New York, NY 10005
John J. Kot, Esq. Waters, McPherson & McNeill 300 Lighting Way - 7th Floor PO Box 1560 Secaucus, NJ 07096
Renee Simon Lesser, Esq. Simon Lesser 420 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10170
David C. Weinberg, Esq. Segal, McCambridge, Singer & Mahoney, Ltd 830 Third Avenue, Suite 400 New York, NY 10022
Michael A. Tanenbaum, Esq. Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold, LLP 3 Gateway Center, 12th Floor Newark, NJ 07 102-53 1 1
Scott R. Emery, Esq.
Hnagland, Longo, Moran, Dunst 8 Doukas, LLP Attorneys at Law
1501 Broadway Suite 1804 New Vork, NY
Lynch Daskal Emery, LLP 264 West 40th Street New York, NY 10018
Peter Stasz, Esq. H.B. Smith Company, Inc. 47 Westfield Industrial Park Rd. Westfield, MA 01085
Donald R. Pugliese, Esq. McDermott, Will & Emery 340 Madison Avenue 17th Floor New York, NY 10173-1922
Carol G. Snider, Esq. Damon & Morey, LLP Avant Building, Suite 1200 200 Delaware Ave Buffalo, NY 14202-2150
Suzanne Halbardier, Esq. Barry, McTiernan & Moore Two Rector Street, 14th Floor New York, NY 10006
Daniel McNamara, Esq. DeCicco, Gibbons & McNamara, P.C. 14 East 38th Street New York, NY 100 16
Thomas Canevari, Esq. Freehill, Hogan & Mahar, LLP 80 Pine Street New York, NY 10005
Frederick D. Berkon, Esq. Leader & Berkon, LLP 630 Third Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10017
Rob C. Tonogbanua, Esq. Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C. 41 South Haddon Avenue, Suite 5 Haddonfield. NJ 08033
Ruthe A. Nepf, Esq. Thompson Hine LLP 335 Madison Ave, 12th Floor New York. NY 10015
Hoagland, Longo, Maran, Dunst 8 Doukas, LLP Attorneys at Law
1501 Broadway Suite 1804 New Yark, NY
John Ronca, Jr,, Esq. Ronca, Hanley, Nolan & Zarernba, LLP Five South Regent Street, Suite 517 Livingston, NJ 07039
HOAGLAND, LONGO, M O W , DUNST & DOUKAS, LLP
-tk Sworn to before me this L d a y of 4pri1, 2010
ALESANDRA L. FARRELL NrnARYPUBUCOF NEWERs€r My - EqJb lW18m)lrD
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
In Re: NEW YORK CITYASBESTOS LITIGATION
LEONARD GOLDBERG, Plaintiff($),
-against-
A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, et al.,
Defendants.
Index No.: 190046/2009
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEFLEFORE, Defendant CURTISS-WRIGHT FLOW CONTROL CORPORATION,
named Individually and as Successor to Fams Valves and/or Sprague Pumps (“CURTISS-
WRIGHT”) hereby requests Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against Defendant Curtiss-
Wright with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant, Curtiss-Wright be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs
to either part . Dated: $i$f , 2010 NewYor ,Ne York
3 0 2010 WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY, LTD.
EW YORK qzcr2-lc --mF Rank lwmhF%q , .~&-[~i Q M J h t l n ,E$?. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, NY 10003 (212) 558-5500
Curtiss-Wright Flow Control Corporation 830 Third Avenue, Suite 400 New York, NY 10022
SO ORDERED,
APR 3 0.2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY NYCAL
I.A.S. Part 30 ASBESTOS LITIGATION I I (Heitler, J.)
I Index No.: 1901 15/09 I 1
I THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO:
I I JOSEPH R. COLLINS AND LENORE A.
COLLrNS, I NO OPPOSITION I I SUMMARY JUDGMENT I MOTION AND ORDER Plaintiff( s) I I
-against- I
A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, et al,, I I I
........ . . . . ........... . . . . . . . . .... .... i... . . . . -
Defiendant(s). I
WHEREFORE, defendant, Sid Harvey Industries, Inc. Company hereby requests
summary judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant, Sid Harvey Industries, Inc. with prejudice,
and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Sid Harvey Industries, Inc. be and the same are hereby dismissed with
without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
Q+A ,2010 I
I I
I MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. Attorneys for Defendants Sid Harvey Industries, Inc, 80 Broad Street - 23rd Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 509-3456
Attorneys for Plaintiff Joseph R. Collins and Lenore A. Collins 300 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10017 (212) 986-2233
3 0 2010 SO ORDERED,
066-0001
......... "."_"" ....... +.* .-+, ...... ......................... ; 31 Yi.''.A 1
I
I :I c rw1 r.l ;:I f I t ' (S 1, I ............................................................................... ........... ............. ..-l-l". ......
..... "'1. ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . ,.._:.: ,:,. e-;.. #, ..'"..... ;. ..... ' j ..'\
,';,,., ....... sl"".."-' ... .;;/ I-,,," ,,.,, ......... ', i',,, ....... ,., ..I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY / NYCAL
ASBESTOS LITIGATION j I.A.S. Part 30 ! (Heitler, J.)
THIS DOCUMENT REFERS TO: i Index No.: 190 120/09
DARRELL R. DALTON and JOANNE J. DALTON, i
Plaintiffs,
-against-
! NO OPPOSITION ! SUMMARY JUDGMENT i MOTION AND ORDER
A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, et al.,
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, defendant, Taco, Inc., hereby requests summary judgment in the above
entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint
against defendant, Taco, Inc., with prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Taco, Inc., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York Ay-; \ \ 3 ,2010
Taco, Inc. MCGIVNEY & KLUGER, P.C. 80 Broad Street-Suite 2300 New York, New York 10004 (2 12) 509-3456
Attorney for Plaintiffs Darrell R. Dalton and Joanne J. Dalton
360 Lexington Avenue, 20th Floor New York, New York 10170
EARLY & STMUSS, LLC
(2 12) 986-2233
SO ORDERED,
A m 3 0 2010
Y
i
542-1 301
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THOMAS C. CARROLL AND CHERYL CARROLL, PLAINTIFF( S),
vs.
A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, et al., DEFENDANTS.
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (HON. SHERRY KLEIN HEITLER) INDEX NO.: 190125/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND OFtDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Elliott Turbomachinery Co., requests summary judgment in the
above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against defendant, Elliott Turbomachinery Co., with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant, Elliott Turbomachinery Co., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without
F I L E D costs. Cl-rL -101 a
Charles Ferguson, WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 1 SO Maiden Lane New York, New York 10038
&(&& Attorneys for Elliott Turbomachinery Co. 233 Broadway New York, New York 10279
(212) 558-5500 (2 12) 227-7878
SO ORDERED: Hon. Sherry Klein Heiger
t
Louis 0. D'Addio : NO OPPOSITION
: MOTIONANDORDER SUMMAlRY JUDGEMENT
above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules $3212, dismissing plaintiffs9 complaint
against defendant COLUMBIA BOILERS with prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition
thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant
COLUMBIA BOILERS be and the same are hereby dismissed with -tc ~
Dated: New York, New York March 23,20 10
- Au& P. Raphael, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff FELDMAN KIEFFER LEVY, PHILLIPS, & KONIGSBERG,LLP 800 3d Ave. 13'" FL
New York, NY 10022
& HERMAN, LLP The Dun Building 1 10 Pearl Street, Suite 400 Buffalo, New York 14202
00184141.WPD
1 ’ I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
LOUIS G. D’ADDIO, NYCAL I.A.S. Part30
: (Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler) Plaintiff( s), -against-
: Index No.: 190 125-09 A.O. SMITH WATER PRODUCTS COMPANY, et al., NO-OPPOSITION SUMMARY
JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER Defendants. X --”-----”---------------”------------------------”-------
WHEREFORE, defendant POWERS, a DIVISION OF WATTS WATER
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. s/h/a POWERS, a WATTS INDUSTRIES CO. and POWERS, a
DIVISION OF WATTS WATER TECHNOLOGIES, INC, (“Defendant”), hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section
32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant Defendant. with prejudice, and there
being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant be, and the same are hereby, dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: ;I Iq,zo)o Ne& York, Hew York
Attorneys for Plaintiff(s) 800 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 (2 12) 605-6200
Attorneys for Defendant POWERS, a Division of WATTS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 599 Lexington Avenue 0 1 New York, NY 10022 @Q
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
LORRAINE PIETROWSKI Individually and as the Executrix of the Estate of CHESTER PIETROWSKI
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index: 09/190125
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGEMENT MOTIQ NANDO RDER
above entitled case, pursuant tu Civil Practice Law and Rules $3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint
against defendant COLUMBIA BOILERS with prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition
thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to d l codefendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant
COLUMBIA BOILERS be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs. - Dated: New York, New York
March43,20 10 4 A// + Audrey'P. phae , Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff FELDMAN KIEFFER L E W , PHILLIPS, & KONIGSBERG,LLP 800 3d Ave. 1 3 ~ FL
New York, NY 10022
& HERMAN, LLP The Dun Building 110 Pearl Street, Suite 400 Buffalo, New York 14202
F I L E D APR 3 0 2010
So Ordered
00184143, WPD
NEW YORK CQUNN CLERK'S
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
RICHARD KURTZ
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)r ~
Index No: 19020 106430/00 121 981/99
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation,
be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without cost v\LED Dated: New York,
--..~ ' v
Charles F e r g E , &q-' WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 521-5400
SO ORDERED, 2010
US-ACTIVE-1 03445024.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
Index No.: 19 0210/09 /1( In Re: NEW YORK CITYASBESTOS LITIGATION
NICHOLAS LOVAGLIO, NO OPPOSITION Plaintiff(s), SUMMARY JUDGMENT
MOTION - against -
AC and S, INC., (ARMSGTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) et al.,
De fendant s .
WHEREFORE, Defendant WEIL-MCLATN COMPANY, INC., hereinafter (“WEIL-
MCLAIN”) hereby requests Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against Defendant Weil-
McLain with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant, Weil-McLain be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice
to either party.
Seeger Weiss Attorney for Plaintiff 1 William Street New York, NY 10038 Weil-McLain
Attorneys for Defendant
830 Third Avenue, Suite 400 New York, NY 10022 (21 2) 65 1-7500
SO ORDERED,
This Document Relates To: NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
Nicholas Lovaglio - - - - - - - - - - - - - - l - " - - - _ - - c - l - ~ - - l - - l n l ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ X Index No.: 190210/09
WHETCIEFORE, defendant OFFICEMAX INCORPORATED (formerly known as BOISE
CASCADE CORPORATION), improperly pled as BOISE CASCADE, LLC, (hereinafter "DEFENDANT"),
hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil h c t i c e Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OFFICEMAX INCORPORATED, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all codefendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant
OFFICEh4(iX INfORPORATED, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
L INE & FORD P.C.
Christopher S. Kozak Attorneys for Plaintiff 1 William Street, 10th Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 584-0700
n I
So Ordered: l Hon. Sheny Idein Heitler
Attorneys for Defendant OFFICEMAX INCORPORATED 120 Braadway, 27th Floor New York, New York 10271-0079 (212) 238-4800
493438.1 DOCN
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ALL COUNTIES WITHIN THE CITY OF NF,W YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION, I.A.S. Part 30 3--.._uc_lll-l___-111----..--111111- -X (Heitier, J.) NICHOLAS LOVAGLIO and DOROTHY LOVAGLIO,
NYCAL
Plaintiffs,
- against - A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, et al.,
Defendants.
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION
Index No.: 00190210-09
WHEREFOW, defendant SEQUOIA VENTURES INC. fMa BECHTEL CORP., hereby
kquests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Swtion
3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant SEQUOIA VENTURES MC. fMa BECHTEL
COW., with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDEFtED, that upon notice to all codefendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant
SEQUOIA VENTURES INC. f/k/a BECHTEL CORP., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
- % R N A L U J q Attorneys for Plaintiff One William Street, lo* Floor New York, New York 10004 (212) 584-0700
-.,
So Ordered:
LANDMAN CORSI BALLAINE & FORD P.C.
Erin Glover-Frey 0 Attorneys for Defendant SEQUOIA VENTURE* L M a BECHTEL CO
New York, New York 1027 1-00_74 3 0 120 Broadway, 27th F1 r IC$
484880.1 DocsNY
Plaintiffs,
.against- NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, Defendant, Crosby Valve, Inc., improperly sued as Tyco International,
Inc., Individually, as successor to and doing business as Tyco Valves and Controls LP, Crosby
Valve and Hancock (hereinafter “Crosby”), hereby requests summary judgment in the above-
entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs
complaint against Defendant Crosby with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all ce-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant Crosby be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and w i u d
T
~~ $+ $‘,+--- Christopher P. Hannan, Esq. Tu \ -
Seeger Weiss, LLP One William Street, 10* Floor New York, New York 10004 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
KELLEY JASONS MCGOW
120 Wall Street, 30th Floor New York, New York 10005 Attorneys for Defendant: Crosby Valve, Inc.
SPTNELLI & HANNA, LL 1c45’
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
~~
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
NICHOLAS LOVAGLIO and DOROTHY LOVAGLIO Index No. 19021 0109
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, Robert A. Keasbey Co., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Robert A. Keasbey Co., be and the same are hereby dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
Colleen M. Cronin 1
Seeger Weiss LLP NY 1 William Street - 10th Floor New York, NY 10004
Attorneys for Defendant Robert A. Keasbey C Weiner Lesniak LLP kd - 888 Veterans Memorial Hauppauge, NY I 1788
4@
rry Klein Heitler Q SO ORDERED, I
Hon. She1
2 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
NICHOLAS LOVAGLIO and DOROTHY LOVAGLIO Index No. 00190210/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Borg-Warner Corporation, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, Borg-Warner Corporation, with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Borg-Warner Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed
with prejudice and without costs.
Anna M. DiLonardo Attorneys for Defendant Borg-Warner Corporation Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial l-f&J Hauppauge, NY 1 1788
'ldlI1111 I
Seeger Weiss LLP NY I William Street - 10th Floor New York, NY 10004
so ORDERED,
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 0 N
~
This Document Relates to:
SABE VARSANO
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30, (Heitler, J.) - Index No:
1 144100 I25770199
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
~
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation,
be and the same are hereby dismissed
Dated: New York, New York II Y - [ F d a)*
Charles Ferguson, Esq. WEITZ t~ LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
with
-
prejudice and without costs.
Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (2 1 2) 52 1 -5400
SO ORDERED, 3 0 2010
US-ACTIVE-1 03446225.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY
ASBESTOS LITIGATION (Heitler, J ~ I ~ This Document Relates to: Index No: I90219109
SABE VARSANO NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, NeN Yock F I L E D
LeTYW
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. A I Charles Ferguson, Esq.
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
&!Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (21 2) 521 -5400
/ - SO ORDERED, Hon. Shertf K: Heitler
US-ACTIVE-1 0344621 7.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 0 N
This Document Relates to:
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190232/09
ALDO SCHINELLA NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation,
FILED ; be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs
Dated: New York. New York
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York I0003 (21 2) 558-5500
R E D SMITH LLP - Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 521-5400
SO ORDERED,
US-ACTIVE-1 034461 42.1
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 ON
This Document Relates to:
ALDO SCHINELLA
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190232/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York. New York
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York I0003 (21 2) 558-5500
REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (2 1 2) 52 I -5400
US-ACTIVE-1 034461 22.1
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
JOSEPH MEOLA
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: I90237109
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintws complaint against defendant CertainTed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
I
3
i
dismissed with areiudice and without costs.
F I L E D m .
Dated: New York, New York e WElTZ Charles & LUXENBERG, P.C.
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 521-5400
US-ACTIVE-1 03445975.1
I I .
3 IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY
ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 ON
This Document Relates to:
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190259/09
THOMAS C. CARROLL NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
Charles s s WEITZ Attorneys & LUXENBERG, for Plain tiff P.C. REED SMITH LLP
700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York I0022 (2 1 2) 52 I -5400
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry K x i t l e r
US-ACTIVE-1 03444143.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
TERRY TOULANTIS
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190260/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York e Charles Ferguson, Esq.
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
F I L E D
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (2 I 2) 52 I -5400
APR 3 0 2010
US-ACTIVE-1 03446202.1
WEINER LESNIAK
LLP
AhVwyvs at Law
829
PARSIPPANY ROAD
PARSIPPANY, NJ
07014-0038
979-403-1 I O 0
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
TERRY TOULANTIS and HELEN TOULANTIS Index No. 190260/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Bondex International, Inc., hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, Bondex International, Inc., with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Bondex I n t e r n a t i p l , p L b E n D e same are hereby dismissed
with prejudice and without costs.
Attorneys for Plaintiff Weitz & Luxenberg 700 Broadway - 7th floor New York, NY 10003
f Arthur D. Byomberg Esq. Attorneys for Defendant Bondex International, Inc. Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, NY 11788
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
In Re: NEW Y ORK CITYASBESTOS LITIGATION Index No.: l4Q25MW
NO OPPOSITION JAMES VUCETICH, SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff(s), MOTION
i - against -
AC and S, INC., (ARMSGTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) et al.,
Defendants. -. . .
WHEREFORE, Defendant WEIL-MCLAIN COMPANY, INC., hereinafter (“WEIL-
MCLAIN”) hereby requests Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiff’s complaint against Defendant Weil-
McLain with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant, Weil-McLain be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs
to either party.
Dated: ,2010
I /
FKXTlk -UTE, Ebq. Taw & w ~ h 3 n , E J ~ I
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Je SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE
9* &‘ Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorneys for Defendant 4) Q
SINGER & MAHONEY, LT*?%
+t$ B-5 G 6 New York, NY 10003 Weil-McLain
830 Third Avenue, Suite 400&,,~i New York, NY 10022
(212) 558-5500
(212) 651-7500
SO ORDERED,
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J .)
Index No: 190261/09
JAMES VUCETICH NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10003
REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation
New York, New York 10022 (21 2) 558-5500 (2 1 2) 52 1 -5400
SO ORDERED, APR 3 o zato
APR 3 0 2010
US-ACTIVE-1 03446235.1
r- f ?
This Document Relates To: .-
I NYCAL
: (Won. Sherry Klein Heitler)
: Index No@).: 190262-09
JAMES STEWART and PATRICIA STEWART,: I.A.S, part 3o
Plaintiffs,
-against-
T
A.O. SMITH WATER PRODUCTS COMPANY, et al., NQ-OPPOSITION SUMMARY
JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER Defendants.
X ________________________________I_______""_-----"------_
WHEFCEFORE, defendant SQUARIl D COMPANY hereby requests summary
judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant SQUARE I) COMPANY with prejudice, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all codefendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant SQUARE D COMPANY be, and the same are hereby, dismissed with prejudice and
without costs.
r-*
K&L GATES LLP Attorneys for Defendant SQUARE D COMPANY
Attorneys for Plaintiffs 800 Third Avenue, 13 Floor New York, NY 10022
I> (2 12) 605-6200
SO ORDERED,
NW-330301 VI I
-
533.23231/SFB ;UPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW JOUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION :
rhis document relates to:
XOBERTA FRIEDMAN and STUART ?RIEDMAN,
\.I. FRIEDMAN, et al.,
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, defendant, A.I.
YORK
NYCAL I A S PART 30 (Honorable Sherry L e i n Heitler
Index No. : 190263/09
(April 2010 In Extremis Trial Group)
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
Friedman, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law
and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff’s Complaint against
defendant, A.I. Friedman, with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto.
ORDERED, that upon notice to all
crossclaims ,&inst defendant, A. I. Friedman,
NEW YQRK New Jersey wm= R K s m =
Attorneys for Plaintiff & FLINN 546 Fifth Avenue, 4th Floor Attorneys for Defendant, New York, New York 10036 A.I. Friedman
72 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 350 P.O. Box 438 East Hanover, New Jersey 07936
SO ORDERED, Y
Honorable Sherry Klein Heitler
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
JOHN FRISONE
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.) Index No:
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
C(-CFlO
Charles Fer sq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plain tiff 700 Broadway 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10003
Ce rta i nTeed Corporation
New York, New York 10022 (2 1 2) 558-5500 (2 I 2) 52 1 -5400
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry K. Heitler
US-ACTIVE-1 03444367.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 ON
This Document Relates to:
FRANK D’ALESSANDRO
NYCAL 1,A.S. Part30 (Heitler, J.) Index No: 190273/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
plyt E r ) claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Jodfhan B. Kromberg, Esq. REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 521-5400
SO ORDERED,
hpR 3u mu
US-ACTIVE-1 03444200.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
This Document Relates to:
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler. J.)
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
, I
Index No: 190273/09
FRANK D’ALESSANDRO NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation,
be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without cost
Charles Ferguson, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 521-5400
Hon. Sherry K. Heitler
US-ACTIVE-1 03444214.1 ! T? 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
~
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 0 N
This Document Relates to:
NANCY BONELLI
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.) Index No: 190277/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (2 I 2) 52 1 -5400
SO ORDERED,
APR 3 o tam
US-ACTIVE-1 03444038.1
APR.ZD.ZD1D 0 4 : 3 7 1 9 1 7 4 4 8 7 6 6 5 Belluck 6 Fox LLP
P1 ain !.i 1'1; i N O OYY081110N I SlJ.M.M.A.KY J U.UGNWN1'
-against- ! MOTTON AND ORDER
# 0 2 0 8 P.004 /004
23r
3 0 2010
-
Attorney h r PlainIilY Roharl Horn BELLLICK <!k Fox, LLP 541; Fiilli hvcmlc, 4" Floor Nuw York, New York 10036 (212) 681-1575
A. W. CHESTERTON, et al. : NO-OPPOSITION SUMMARY : JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, defendant SQUARE D COMPANY hereby requests summary
judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant SQUARE D COMPANY with prejudice, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-
defendant SQUARE D COMPANY be, and the same are hereby, dismis
K&L GATES LLP Attorneys for Defendant SQUARE D COMPANY One Newark Center, Tenth Floor Newark, NJ 071 02-5252
546 Fifth Avenue, 4th Floor New York, NY 10036 (212) 681-1575
NW-330250 V I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
~
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION ~
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
WILLIAM PIPER Index No. 190282/09
NO OPPOSITION SU MMARY J U DG M ENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant, Borg-Warner Corporation, hereby requests summary
judgment in the above entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules 5 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant, Borg-Warner Corporation, with
prejudice in this action, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all eo-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against defendant Borg-Warner Corporation, be and the same are hereby dismissed
with prejudice and without costs.
DATED: &?I / h ,2010 A h
Early & Strauss 360 Lexington Avenue, 20th Floor P.O. Box 3601 New York, NY I001 7
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry
Andrew M. Warshauer Attorneys for Defend ant Borg-Warner Corporation Weiner Lesniak LLP 888 Veterans l $ q i ~ i ~ ~ Hauppauge, N 1 8
-"om@
APR 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 ON
This Document Relates to: I Index No: 190285/09
ARTHUR NEFF NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation,
be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York F I L E D
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (2 1 2) 52 1-5400
? 3 0 2010, US-ACTIVE-1 03446028.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
Index No.: 190291/09 In Re: NEW YORK CITYASBESTOS LITIGATION
NO OPPOSITION ROBERT LEHNERT, SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff(s), MOTION
- against -
AC and S, INC., (ARMSGTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) et al.,
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, Defendant WEIL-MCLAIN COMPANY, INC., hereinafter (“WEIL-
MCLAIN”) hereby requests Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff’s complaint against Defendant Weil-
McLain with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant, Weil-McLain be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs
to either party.
Dated: iao6 ( 4 -2010
WEITZ&LU
700 Broadway New York, NY 10003
Attorneys for
’ (212) 558-5500
n
I // JennYfer L. Budner, Esq. SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE
Attorneys for Defendant Weil-McLain 830 Third Avenue, Suite 400
New York, NY 10022
SINGER & MAHONEY,
(212) 651-7500
SO ORDERED,
..
J - SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ALL COUNTIES WITHIN NEW YORK CITY
V
NEW Y O N CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION TT
IN RE: NYCAL
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: WILLIAM KLINE and DOROTHY L KLINE
V.
No Opposition Summary Motion and Order
Index No.: 09/190293
WHEREFORE, Defendant, SB DECKING, individually and as successor to SELBY BATTERSBY & Co. (hereinafter “SB DECKING”), hereby request summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing Plaintiffls complaint against Defendant, SB DECKING with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-Defendants, all claims and cross claims against Defendant, SB DECKING, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice without costs.
Attorneys for Plaintiff 360 Lexington Avenue, 20th Floor New York, NY 10017 2 12-986-2233
Attorneys for Defendant, SB Decking The Dun Building 1 10 Pearl Street, 4th Floor Buffalo, New York 14202
-5875 F I L E D SO ORDERED, APR 3 0 2010 I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
In Re New York City Asbestos Litigation
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
DORIS BERGRIN,
Plaintiffs VS.
NATIONAL AUTOMOTIVE PARTS ASSOCIATION, et al,
Defendants
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant NATIONAL AUTOMOTIVE PARTS ASSOCIATION, hereby
requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 32 12, dismissing Plaintiffs Complaint against NATIONAL AUTOMOTIVE PARTS
ASSOCIATION, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross-claims against
defendant NATIONAL AUTOMOTIVE PARTS ASSOCIATION be
and without costs,
Dated: , 2010 Dated:
IPS & KONIGSBERG LLP
- L A , & Brendan J. Tully, Esq, Attorneys for Plaintiff 800 Third Avenue, 13* Floor New York, NY 10022
National Automotive Parts Association The Avant Building, Suite 1200 200 Delaware Avenue Lw Buffalo, New York 14202
SO ORDERED: Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
DORIS BERGRTN, : NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30
: (Hon, Sherry Klein Heitler)
: Index No(s).: 190294-09
Plaintiff( s), -against-
: NO-OPPOSITION SUMMARY ABEX CORP.,f/'Wa American Brake Shoe Company, et al. : JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEFWFORE, defendant SQUARE D COMPANY hereby requests summary
judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant SQUARE D COMPANY with prejudice, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant SQUARE D COMPANY be, and the same are h e r e b p i p k d E w j u d i c e and
without costs.
Dated: "@Y; I c f ! 9 0 ( 0 APR 3 0 2010
Newark, New Jersey lJdkdby w YORK e &&le M. Kozin, Esq.' K&L GATES LLP Attorneys for Defendant SQUARE D COMPANY One Newark Center, Tenth Floor Newark, NJ 071 02-5252
Attorneys for Plaintiff(s 800 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 (212) 605-6200
SO ORDERED, Hon, Sherry Rein Heitler
NW-330231 VI
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
Index No.: 190297109 In Re: NEW YORK CITYASBESTOS LITIGATION
NO OPPOSITION ELIZABETH MONTOYA, SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff(s), MOTION
- against -
AC and S, INC., (ARMSGTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) et al.,
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, Defendant WEIL-MCLAIN COMPANY, INC., hereinafter (“WEIL-
MCLAN’) hereby requests Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against Defendant Weil-
McLain with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant, Weil-McLain be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs
to either party.
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, NY 10003 (212) 558-5500
Jennlyfer L. Bud&, Esq. SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE
-
APR 3 0 2010
yJ&
! !
SINGER & MAHONEY, Attorneys for Defendant Weil-McLain 830 Third Avenue, Suite 400
New York, NY 10022 ~
(212) 651-7500 I
SO ORDERED, 1 Hon, ShenyKlein Heitler
APR 302010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to: I Index No: 190297/09
ELIZABETH MONTOYA NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
summary
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
udgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
4 J o n H a . Kromberg, Esq. Charles %ghson ,dq
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10003
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. R-MITTH LLP Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation
New York, New Yo k'!ot E D (21 2) 558-5500 (212) 521-5400
US-ACTIVE-I 03445995.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part30 I Q 03 78 0 9 (Heitler, J.)
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 0 N
I lndexNo: - This Document Relates to:
ISMENIA GONZALEZ NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York * Charles Ferguson, Esq. J o M a n B. Kromberg, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York. New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 521-5400
Hon. Sher'fy K. Heitler
US-ACTIVE-1 03444422.1
.. .
Plaintiffs,
-against-
ALLIANCE LAUNDRY SYSTEMS LLC, et al.,
: NOOPPOSITION : SUMMARYJUDGMENT : MOTI0NANDORDE;IC
: Him. Sherry K. Heitler : IASPart30
WHEREiFORE, American Lamdry Machinery, hc. ("ALMI") hereby =que&
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to CPLR 3212, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against ALMI, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and ALMI be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
FLEMMING ZULACK WILLIAMSON Attorneys for American
WEITZ & LUXENBURG, LLP
By:
One Liberty Plaza, 35' Floor New York, New York 10006-1404
Andrew J. Sea, Esq. 0 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500
(212) 412-9500
SO ORDERED: APR 3 0 2010 Hon. Sherry K. Heitler, J.S.C.
339933
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
Index No,: 190299/09 In Re: NEW YORK CITYASBESTOS LITIGATION
NO OPPOSITION NUNZY MASSA, SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Plaintiff(s), MOTION
- against - AC and S, INC., (ARMSGTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) et al.,
Cefendants.
WHEREFORE, Defendant MIL-MCLAIN COMPANY, INC., hereinafter (“WEIL-
MCLAIN”) hereby requests Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against Defendant Weil-
McLain with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant, Weil-McLain be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs
to either party.
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, NY 10003 (212) 558-5500
F I L E D
Jennifer L. Budner, Esq.
SINGER & MAHONEY, LT- CIsRK’s OFF’= Attorneys for Defendant Wcil-McLain 830 Third Avenue, Suite 400
New York, NY 10022
SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE NEW YQRk
(2 12) 65 1-7500 . ,
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
APR 3 0 2010
-. . .
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
This Document Relates to:
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler. J.)
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 0 N
, I
Index No: I90299109
NUNZY MASSA NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WH E RE FORE, defendant Ce rtai nTeed Corporation, here by requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
han B. Kromberg, Esq.
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10003 New York, New York I
Charles s Ferguson, Esq.
(21 2) 558-5500 (212) 521-5400
US-ACTIVE-1 03445424.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY
(Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190312/09
ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 ON 1 This Document Relates to:
HAROLD BAIRD NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
I WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the sa
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York q4g-N
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York I0022 (2 1 2) 52 1-5400
/-
uu V I \ Y L I \ L W , ,,I I-
Hon. Sherry K. Heitler
APR 3 U 2010
US-ACTIVE-1 03444032.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 0 N
This Document Relates to: I Index No: 19031 5/09
ANGEL0 GULL0 NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corpo
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
Charles ergusort, WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation
New York, New York I0022
* (21 2) 558-5500 (21 2) 521 -5400
SO ORDERED,
A m 3 0 2010
US-ACTIVE-1 03444450.1
APR.20.2010 0 4 : 3 6 1 9 1 7 4 4 8 7 6 6 5 Belluck & Fox LLP
Tides 'No.: 190333/09
# 0 2 0 8 P . 0 0 3 / 0 0 4 I
WHEREFORE, dcfindarit, 'ihc k*:airbanks Company, Iicrcby rcqucsts sumrnary j udgrneni
"in thc a'bovc critititlcd casc, piirsiimt, to Civil Yractice h w and kiiles $ 3212, disnlissing
L and there being no npposition therelo,
ORDERED, Ihat upon rioticc t.0 all co-defmdant.s, nll claims and Cross claims igainsl
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
NYCAL
(Heitler, J.) ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
Rodney Thaut and Kathryn Lynn Thaut
X _ _ " _ " _ _ 1 _ _ 1 _ 1 - _ _ 1 _ _ _ _ - - 1 - - - 1 1 - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
EREFORE, defendant KELLY-MOORE PAINT COMPANY, INC. hereby gment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules sing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant KELLY-MOORE PAINT th prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
notice to all co-defendants, all PAINT COMPANY, INC. be
BELLUCK & FOX, LLP. Attorney for Plaintiff 546 Fifth Avenue, qfh Floor New York, New York 10036
150 East 42"* S t w New York, New 2 12-490-3000
SOORDERED, ,
Hon. She . Heitler
3899574. I
.. .... . . . . . . -
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
BRUCE J. BOYLE
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 I 9 335 b (Heitler, J.)
Index No: -5/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
B. romberg, Esq. WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. SMITH LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 521-5400
US-ACTIVE-1 0344408 1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNW OF NEW YORK
NYCAL
(Heitler, J .) I.A.S. Part 30 l q o W 5 b q IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY
ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 0 N
I lndexNo: - This Document Relates to:
BRUCE 3. BOYLE NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, forme k l o t e;13) Corporation,
be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs. APR 3 0 20@
Dated: New York,
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. REED SMITH LLP
I
3
I
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (2 12) 558-5500
-- Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 521-5400
US-ACTIVE-1 03444083.1
u '4 ! 7.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates To:
LOREN PUBLICOVER and JACQUELINE PUBLICOVER, : NYCAL
I.A.S.Part30 : (Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler) Plaintiff,
- against -
BELL & GOSSETT COMPANY, et al.
1 Index No(s).: 190336-09
: NO-OPPOSITION SUMMARY ' JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
Defendants. X ____"11_1_____------_----------I----------"--"--------~----
WHEFUZFORE, defendant CRANE CO. hereby requests summary judgment in the
above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing
plaintiffs' complaint against defendant CRANE CO. with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant CRANE CO. be, and the same are hereby, dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
New York,.W
Ni$obM. Kozin, Esq. K&L GATES LLP Attorneys for Defendant CRANE CO. 599 Lexington Avenue
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff(s) 700 Broadway New York, NY 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
New Yark, New York 10022 (212) 536-3900
Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
hPR 3 0 2010 NY-776039 vl
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
X __________________________________________________------- IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates To:
LOREN PUBLICOVER and JACQUELINE PUBLICOVER,
X ___________________________11__1________---_-------------
: NYCAL : I.A.S. Part 30 : (Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler)
: Index No(s).: 190336-09 Plaint iff,
- against -
BELL & GOSSETT COMPANY, et al. : NO-OPPOSITION SUMMARY : JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, defendant SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC, USA, INC., formerly known as
SQUARE ID COMPANY, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against
defendant SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC, USA, INC., with prejudice, and there being no opposition
thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC USA, INC., be, and the same are hereby, dismissed with
prejudice and without costs.
K&L GATES LLP Attorneys for Defendant SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC, USA, INC. 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022
Attorneys for Plaintiff(s) 700 Broadway New York, NY 10003 (212) 558-5500
SO ORDERED, In 4
W2f53g”39sQ,
Hon. Sherry Klein Hiitler
NY-776030 V I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
LOREN PUBLICOVER
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.) Index No: 190336/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York. New York
F I L E D APR 3 0 2010 e $r-\Q
Charles erguso WElTZ & LUXENBERE, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10003 New York, New York 10022 (21 2) 558-5500 (21 2) 521 -5400
US-ACTIVE-1 03446054.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
WElCHl FAN
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190341 /09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington A enue New York, N e w b (21 2) 521 -5400 (21 2) 558-5500
4 4 3 O 2010 SO ORDERED, r
Aa oR 3 0 2010
US-ACTIVE-1 03444346.1
I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.) ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
FORREST HUDSON
Index No: 190352/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
3
i
dismissed with prejudice and without costs. F I L E D Dated: New York, New York
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (2 1 2) 52 I -5400
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry K. Heitler
US-ACTIVE-1 03444972.1
. I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J .)
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to: I Index No: 1903&4/09
JOHN LAMPARTER NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Cor p a \ '0 2. be E& same are hereby
w
3 0 dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York PPR
+IF13 r
Charles Ferguson, Esq' WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York I0022 (212) 521-5400
SO ORDERED,
US-ACTIVE-1 03445037.1
- . . .... . 4 9
C
--?
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY : NYCAL X _______________________-__________------------""-----------"--"----
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates To:
KAREN RICHMAN, NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AS TO
Plaintiff(s), : FORD MOTOR COMPANY l-4- - against -
Index No.: BONDEX INTERNATIONAL, INC,, et al.,
Defendant( s). :
WHEREFORE, defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY here judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant FORD MOTOR prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
o-defendants, all claims and c OMPANY be and the same are hereby dis
By: Hilary S . Macklin, Esq. AARONSON RAPPAPORT FEINSTEIN & DEUTSCH, LLP Attorneys for Defendant Ford Motor Company 757 Third Avenue New York, New York 10017
New York, New York 10036 Counsel for: Karen Richman
T: 212-593-6700
F-I L E D F: 212-593-6970
APR 3 0 2010 SO ORDERED:
{00854723.DOC } (00841 133.
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
EUGENE R. WALSH
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190358/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs. i
Dated: New York, New York 4 m 3 0 2010
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (2 I 2) 52 1 -5400
K. Heitler SO ORDERED,
US-ACTIVE-1 03446249.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to: I Index No: 190360/09
EINER JENSEN NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York +&-%
Charles er WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 New York, New York I O
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue
9 (21 2) 558-5500 (21 2) 521 -5400
US-ACTIVE-I 034449a5. I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 ON
This Document Relates to:
CLIFTON BOUCHEE
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
IndexNo: % U . U Q &
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
Charles e WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaint iff 700 Broadway 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation
New York, New York 10022 (21 2) 558-5500 (2 I 2) 52 1 -5400
F SO ORDERED,
US-ACTIVE-1 03444054. I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
ROBERT W. ALEXANDER
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190362/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
c(- IT-\o
Charles Ferguson, Esq. WElTZ & LUXENBERE, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10003
REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation
New York, New York I0022
R&- (21 2) 558-5500 (212) 521-5400
SO ORDERED, e Hon. Sherry K. Heitler
US-ACTIVE-I 03444023.1
i I
1
APR.20.2010 04:36 19174487665 Bolluck b Fox LLP
j Iiidex No.: 190363/09 GERALD MO0,R.S and JOAN MOORS,
n o 2 0 8 P.002 / 0 0 4
wit.hout costs.
634-24
8
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
X
GERALD MOORS and JOAN MOORS,
Plaintiffs, -V-
A.O. SMITH WATER PRODUCTS, et al.,
Defendants .
Index No, 190363/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY .JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
Justice Sherry K. Heitler
WHEREFORE, defendant Goodall Rubber Company (“Goodall”) hereby requests summary
judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint against defendant Goodall with prejudice, and there being no
opposition thereto,
Ordered, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant
Goodall Rubber Company be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
BELLI.
BY: -
March a, 2010
u Attornewfor Defendant 116’E. 27” Street, 12th Floor
New York, NY 1001 7 New York, NY 10016 (212) 681-1575 (212) 452-5300
-----<. ~
SO ORDERED: Justice Sherry K, Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
GERALD EPSTEIN
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.) Index No: 190373/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hFJBby I r dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. REED SMITH LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York I0022 (212) 521-5400
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry-&. Heitbr
US-ACTIVE-1 03444327.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 ON
This Document Relates to:
MARIO RIVADENEYRA
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190374/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation,
be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
F I L E D
Charles F e r g u s o m WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (2 1 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (2 1 2) 52 1 -5400 e&-
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry K. h i t l e r
US-ACTIVE-1 034461 09.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J .)
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to: I Index No: 190374/09
MARIO RIVADENEYRA NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are he
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York q-lpo
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaint iff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 New York, New York 10022
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue
0 (21 2) 558-5500 (2 I 2) 52 1-5400
SO ORDERED,
US-ACTIVE-1 03446061.1
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GATlON
This Document Relates to:
ORISON CASS
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190375/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
Charles k q u s o d s q . WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
SO ORDERED,
: Jonat R E ~ M I T H LLP Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (2 I 2) 52 I -5400
F I L E D APR 3 0 2010
NEW YORK WUNTYGURWoFFII#
US-ACTIVE-I 034441 74.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 0 N
This Document Relates to: Index No: 190376/09
CALVIN CARSON NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
9
I I
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
Attorneys for CertainTeed C c e i D 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New YorkFO\; ! (2 I 2) 52 1-5400 Q %Q'O
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
US-ACTIVE-1 034441 53.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LIT1 GAT1 0 N
This Document Relates to:
DONALD LONG0
NYCAL ~ I.A.S. Part30 ~ (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190377/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York. New York I -
WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
Attorneys for 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 100221 4
“0 (212) 521-5400
US-ACTIVE-1 03445064.1
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.) ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to: I Index No: 190378/09
KENNETH McDOWELL NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant CertainTeed Corporation, hereby requests
summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules
Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant CertainTeed
Corporation, with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant CertainTeed Corporation be and the same are hereby
dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: New York, New York
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10003
Attorneys for CertainTeed Corporation
New York, New York 1OOF I L E D (21 2) 558-5500 (2 I 2) 52 1 -5400
US-ACTIVE-1 03445962. I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE NEW YORK COUNTY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates to:
ROSA TORRES
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No: 190379/09
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
J
WHEREFORE, defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as
Dana Corporation, hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 321 2, dismissing plaintiffs complaint
against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation, with
prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against defendant Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation,
F I L E D be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without co
Dated: New York, New York
Charles F e r w n , Esq. WElTZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (21 2) 558-5500
A APR 3 o 2010
m R R ! Jon at h &!!& be rg , Esq . REEQ&~TTH LLP Attorneys for Dana Companies, LLC, formerly known as Dana Corporation 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 (212) 521-5400
SO ORDERED,
US-ACTIVE-103446192.1
. ..
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
WHERFiFORF?,, defendant Terex USA, LLC improperly sued herein as "Terex Cranes, a
division of Terex Corporation, Individually, and as successor in interest to Terex American, as
successor in interest to American Crane Corporation, as successor in interest to Lorain, Terex
Northwestern," and "Terex Lorain, Individually, and as successor in interest to Lorain" (hereinafter
"Terex USA"), hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendant Terex USA
with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendant Terex USA, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice
Dated: New York, NY April 1,2010
By: T W B Patti Burshtyn, Esq. WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C Attorneys for Plaintiffs 700 Broadway New York, NY 10003 (212) 791-0285
Terex USA, LLC 50 Jericho Quadrangle, Suite 300 Jericho, NY 1 1753 ( 5 16) 832-7500
A t I ."".
SO ORDERED, Hon. Sherry Klein Healer
12946683.1 APR 3 0 2010
03/30/2010 1
!
58 FAX 2123196932 LAVIN COLEMAN @ 0 0 3
Plaintiffs,
-against-
NO OPPOSITII:1N SUMMARY JU: )GMENT MOTION AND IIRDER
P U T T & W I T N E Y P O W R SYSTEMS, INC,; And UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPOFCATION, Individually and as Successor to Pratt & Whitney (Pratt & Whitney/Aircraft Division); et al.
Defendants, UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPO€UTION s/h/a United T dtmlogias
Corporation, Individually and as Successor to Pratt & Whitney (Pratt & Whit,iey/Aircrafl
Division) and PR4TI & WHITNEY POWER SYSlEMS, JNC., an unincorporated division of
UNITED TECHNOLOGIES COWOUTION (hereinafter "UTC and Pratt & W itney"), by
their attorneys, LAVIN, O'NEIL, RTCCI, CEDRONE & DiSIPIO, hereby reques:~ summary
judgment in the above-entided case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Sel:tion 3212,
dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against defendants, UTC and Pratt & Whitney, wit 'I prejudice,
and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
defendants, UTC and Pratt and Whitney, be and the same are hereby di p s i d c igyu& and without costs.
,2010
UISLPLO U U C
Attorneys for Defendant United Technologies Corporation mnd Pratt and Whitney Power Systemz , Inc.
xington Avenue, Suite 2900 ark, New York 10 170
Belluck & Fox Attorneys for Plaintiffs 546 Fifth Avenue, 4Lh Floor New York, New York 10036
SO ORDERED:
'APR 3 0 2010
I
4
I
4 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YOFX
IN RE NEW YORK CITY X - _ _ _ _ - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l l _ _ r _ r -
NYCAL
(Heitler, S.)
Index No: 190068/10
ASBESTOS LITIGATION I.A.S. Part 30
X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . This Document Relates To:
Dominick Palaio
. "
NO OPPOSITION I SUMMARY
MOTION AND ORDER
JUDGMENT ~
X - - - - - - - -
WHEREFORE, defendant OAKFABCO, INC. hereby requests swnmary judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against defendant OAKFABCO, INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against defendant OAKFABCO, INC., be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dated: ~ ~ @ e w , Y a k
WEITZ & LUXENBE Attorney for 700 Broadway
212-558-5500
WILSON, ELSER, MOSROWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP Attorney for Defendant OAKFABCO, INC. 33 Washington Street Newark, New Jersey 071 02-3017 973-624-0800
SO ORDERED,
APR 302010
970973. I
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates To: DOMINICK PALAIO and ANNA PALAIO,
X -___l---___-----___l________l____l___l
X - ” - - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ - - - - - ” - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Plaintiff( s), -against-
$ NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No.: 190068-10
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, Defendant, WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, sued herein
as “WEYERHAEUSER CO.”, and its past and present parents, affiliates and subsidiaries
and its predecessors and successors in interest and its agents, heirs and assigns
(“Defendant”), hereby request Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiff‘s complaint against
Defendant with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against Defendant, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without
costs.
MCGUIREWOODS LLP Attorneys for Defendant 1345 Avenue of the Americas 7” Floor
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003
New York, NY 10105 F I L E D (212) 558-5500 (212) 548-2100
SO ORDERED, APR 3 o m a
COUNTY CL€RRSOFFK;F
Honorable Shye;rfrq n Heitler NEW YORK
ApR 8 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
In Re: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION Index No.: 190068/10
I.A.S. Part 3 9 Hon. Sherry K. Heitler DOMINICK PALAIO,
Plaintiffs, NO OPPOSITION
MOTION AND ORDER - against - SUMMARY JUDGMENT
A.C.& S. INC., et al., Defendants.
WHEREFORE, Defendant KOHLER CO. hereby requests Summary Judgment
in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212,
dismissing plaintiff's complaint against Defendant KOHLER CO. with prejudice, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against Defendant, KOHLER CO. be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice
Dated: , 2010
WEITZ & LUXENBERG, P.C. SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE
700 Broadway Kohler New York, NY 10003 (212) 558-5500
830 Third Avenue, Suite 400 New York, NY 10022 (3 1 3) 65 1 -7509
AM 3 o 2010 SO ORDERED,
Hon. Sherry K. Heitler
p#R 3 0 2010
3 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
Index No.: 190070/10 In Re: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
I.A.S. Part 3!@ Hon. Sherry K. Heitler ROLAND BARBIER,
Plaintiffs, NO OPPOSITION
MOTION AND ORDER - against - SUMMARY JUDGMENT
A.C.& S. INC., et al., Defendants.
WHEFCEFORE, Defendant KOHLER CO. hereby requests Summary Judgment
in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 3212,
dismissing plaintiff's complaint against Defendant KOHLER CO. with prejudice, and
there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims
against Defendant, KOHLER CO. be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice
and without costs to 'ther party.
Dated: 70 ,2010 New Yor ew York
SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE
700 Broadway Kohler New York, NY 10003 (212) 558-5500
830 Third Avenue, Suite 400 New York, NY 10022 (212) 651-7500
A m 3 0 2010 SO ORDERED,
APR 3 0 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION
This Document Relates To: ROLAND BARBIER,
X ----________--_l_"l___________I_______
x "__"__--_____"____-____ll__________ll_
Plaintiff( s) , -against-
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Heitler, J.)
Index No.: 190070-10
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, Defendant, WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY, sued herein
as "WEYERHAEUSER CO.", and its past and present parents, affiliates and subsidiaries
and its predecessors and successors in interest and its agents, heirs and assigns
("Defendant"), hereby request Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to
Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against
Defendant with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross
claims against Defendant, be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without
costs.
MCGUIREWOODS LLP Attorneys for Defendant 1345 Avenue of the Americas
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway New York, New York 10003 (212) 558-5500 New 7fh Floor York, NY 10105 F I L E D
(2 12) 548-2 100
SO ORDERED, APR 3 0 2010
couNMcerEF#cs- NEW YORM
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ALL COUNTIES WITHIN NEW YORK CITY
IN RE: NEW YORK COUNTY X _----____--______---------------------
ASBESTOS LITIGATION X
This Document Relates to: Roland Barbier,
Plaintiff, - against -
A . O . Smith Water Products Co., et al.,
c
NYCAL I.A.S. Part 30 (Judge Heitler)
Index No.: 190070/10
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY J U D M N T MOTION AND ORDER
WHEREFORE, defendant Mario & DiBono Plastering Co. Inc.,
hereby requests summary judgment in the above-entitled case,
pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules Section 53212, dismissin!
plaintiffs' Complaint against defendant Mario & DiBono Plasterin!
Co. Inc., with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims anc
cross claims against defendant Mario & DiBono p l a l t k i e 13 Inc., be dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
APR 3 0 2010
Weitz & Luxenberg, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff Attorneys for Defendant R o l a n d B a r b i e r 700 Broadway, 6th Floor Inc. New York , New York 10003 177 Montague Street
M a r i o & DiBono P l a s t e r i n g Co.
Brooklyn, New York 11201
Our File No.: 10924-6176 (718) 855-9000
So Ordered: Hon. ShFrry K. Heitler
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
Index No.: 190070/10 In Re: NEW YORK CITYASBESTOS LITIGATION
ROLAND BARBIER, Plaintiff(s), NO OPPOSITION
SUMMARY JUDGMENT - against - MOTION
AC and S, INC., (ARMSGTRONG CONTRACTING & SUPPLY) et al.,
Defendants.
WHEREFORE, Defendant WEIL-MCLAIN COMPANY, INC., hereinafter (“WEIL-
MCLAIN”) hereby requests Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Section 3212, dismissing plaintiffs complaint against Defendant Weil-
McLain with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims against
Defendant, Weil-McLain be and the same are hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs
to either party. 1
Dated: 417 ,2010
’5 SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Attorneys for Defendant New York, NY 10003 Weil-McLain (212) 558-5500
SINGER & MAHONEY, LTD.
830 Third Avenue, Suite 4 New York, NY 10022 ’1 (212) 651-7500
w? 3 SO ORDERED, 20?@
Hon. Sherry Klein Heitler
A.O. SMITH WATER PRODUCTS, CO., et ala
Index No,: 190070/10
NO OPPOSITION SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND ORDER
I.A.S. Part 30 Hon. Sherry K. Heitlei-
WHEREFORE, Defendant AMERICAN BILTRITE INC. (hereinafter "AMERICAN
BILTRITE"), hereby requests Summary Judgment in the above-entitled case, pursuant to Civil
Practice Law and Rules Sections 32 12, dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against Defendant
AMERICAN BILTRlTE INC. with prejudice, and there being no opposition thereto,
Defendant, AMERICAN BILTRITE INC. be and the
and without costs to either partya
ORDERED, that upon notice to all co-defendants, all claims and cross claims agEainst
same are h e r e ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ r e j u d ~ k e
Attorneys for Plaintiff 700 Broadway Now York, New York 10003
Attorneys for Defendant American Biltrite 830 Third Avenue, Suite 400 New York, New York 10022
SO ORDERED, -
Inc.