`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1005
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/06/2018
`
`OF NEW YORK
`
`OF THE STATE
`SUPREME
`COURT
`OF NEW YORK
`COUNTY
`----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`NEW YORK CITY
`ASBESTOS
`LITIGATION
`----------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`ANN MARIE
`of
`as Executrix
`the Estate
`MCGLYNN,
`
`IDELL,
`Deceased,
`
`:
`:
`:
`
`Index
`Date
`
`No.:
`Filed:
`
`190219/2016
`08/01/2016
`
`: :
`
`ORDER WITH
`OF ENTRY
`: NOTICE
`
`of THOMAS
`
`: :
`
`:
`
`: :
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`-against-
`
`AERCO
`
`INTERNATIONAL,
`
`INC.,
`
`et al.
`
`Defendants.
`
`_____________------------------__-------------------------------------------------X
`TAKE
`PLEASE
`the within
`that
`NOTICE,
`
`is a true
`
`copy
`
`of an Order
`
`dated March
`
`6,
`
`2018
`
`and
`
`entered
`
`in the Office
`
`of
`
`the Clerk
`
`of Court
`
`on March
`
`6, 2018.
`
`Date:
`
`New York
`New York,
`March
`6, 2018
`
`CONROY
`
`HANLY
`SIMMONS
`for Plaintiffs
`Attorneys
`112 Madison
`Avenue
`NY 10016-7416
`New York,
`84-6400
`(212)
`~i'
`
`es M. Kraimer,
`
`Esq.
`
`1 of 3
`
`
`
`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/06/2018 06:14 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1005
`
`NYSCEF
`
`DOC.
`
`NO.
`
`SUPREME
`PRESENT:
`
`1004
`.
`COURT OF THE STATE
`HON. MARTIN
`
`OF NEW YORK - NEW YORK COUNTY
`SHULMAN
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/06/2018
`INDEX
`NO.
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`03/06/2018
`
`PART
`
`1
`
`Justice
`
`Ann Marie
`
`Idell,
`
`et al,
`
`- v -
`
`Aerco
`
`International,
`
`et al.
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/16
`
`Motion
`
`Seq.
`
`042
`
`The following
`
`papers,
`
`numbered
`
`1 to 4 were read on this motion
`
`to reargue
`
`PAPERSNUMBERED
`
`Notice
`Answering
`Aff.
`Reply
`
`- Affirmations
`of Motion
`Aff./Cross-Motion
`- Exhibits
`A-D
`
`- Exhibits
`- Exhibits
`
`A-Y (NYSCEF
`961-988)
`of Law (NYSCEF
`1-6; Mem.
`
`990-997)
`
`Cross-Motion:
`
`Yes
`
`No
`
`(asbestos
`
`In this
`products
`liability
`on August
`verdict
`17,
`2017,
`awarding
`million
`for
`past
`and
`pain
`suffering
`minimum
`period
`six months
`of
`filed
`post-verdict
`and
`motions,
`14th
`(Dec.
`decision),
`denying
`entirely
`judgment
`of dismissal
`notwithstanding
`motion
`appropriate
`additur.
`Reciting
`increased
`damages
`for
`past
`awards
`and
`to $2.5
`million.
`
`and
`this
`
`x
`
`for
`
`12
`3'
`3
`4
`
`a
`
`returned
`
`a
`
`$1.8
`(plaintiff)
`to cover
`parties
`14,
`for
`
`2017
`
`14"'
`
`and
`
`§5501[c]
`
`pain
`
`action,
`plaintiff
`for
`
`pain
`
`alia
`inter
`a jury
`exposure)
`Thomas
`McGlynn
`then-living
`$1.5
`million
`future
`pain
`and
`and
`suffering
`year.
`Both
`period
`of one
`up to a maximum
`on December
`issued
`a bench
`decision
`court
`motion
`defendant
`Jenkins
`Bros.'s
`(Jenkins)
`CPLR
`plaintiff's
`the
`but
`verdict,
`granting
`the Dec.
`decretal
`decision
`directives,
`to $4 million
`and
`for
`future
`suffering
`
`uj m
`
`suffering
`
`this
`
`day
`
`additur
`Jenkins
`whether
`
`to these
`stipulate
`to either
`deadline
`Under
`time
`30
`court's
`for
`a re-trial
`on
`or opt
`its appeal
`to perfecting
`prejudice
`damages,
`cause
`to extend
`its
`time
`to consider
`a proposed
`to show
`order
`of $6.5
`to the
`a court
`million.
`At
`on
`increased
`award
`hearing
`Jenkins
`its time
`extension
`in addition
`to
`learned
`that
`request,
`14th
`this
`and
`bolster
`its potential
`appellate
`court's
`Dec.
`decision
`it was
`capable
`of presenting
`arguments
`documentation
`during
`of post-verdict
`to show
`to sign
`the
`order
`motion
`practice.
`Jenkins'
`reargument
`parties
`but
`directed
`the
`denied
`Jenkins'
`On January
`time
`request.
`"Jenkins'
`stipulation
`time
`to decide
`. to a date
`on
`the
`Appellate
`court's
`Dec.
`
`without
`submitted
`stipulate
`this
`court
`reargue
`"new"
`
`and
`
`round
`court
`written
`court
`stipulate
`fourteen
`(14)
`First
`Department,
`Decision]."
`
`implicitly
`agreement
`regarding
`a two
`so-ordered
`attorney
`to the Court's
`additur
`days
`
`following
`Jenkins'
`in
`
`By
`
`fully
`refusing
`motion,
`extension
`
`increasing
`decision
`
`the
`
`currently
`
`extending
`the
`jury's
`award
`to be
`announced
`appeal
`
`of
`
`pending
`
`.
`
`.
`
`by
`[this
`
`sums
`
`to
`2018,
`to
`
`a
`
`this
`to
`
`16,
`January
`was
`seeking
`record
`with
`prior
`the
`this
`cause,
`to
`negotiate
`31,
`2018,
`whether
`or before
`Division,
`14th
`
`not
`
`satisfied,
`the
`identical
`
`motion.
`conceivable
`of dismissal
`plaintiff's
`deny
`proposed
`the
`remedies
`
`its
`
`and
`to sign
`exercise
`
`jury
`declining
`could
`
`Apparently
`cause
`show
`seeking
`show
`cause
`and
`after
`hearing
`14th
`its Dec.
`that
`deCiSIOn
`Was
`post-verdict
`Parenthetically,
`raise
`argument
`every
`trial
`judgment
`notwithstanding
`verdict
`additur
`order
`pursuant
`
`Jenkins
`additional
`arguments
`last word
`the
`Jenkins
`and/or
`
`again
`
`submitted
`relief
`sought
`
`on
`
`a second
`in its
`first
`2018,
`raised
`a full
`
`motion.
`to show
`to CPLR
`
`if
`
`1 of
`
`2
`
`2 of 3
`
`this
`14,
`February
`and
`issue
`on
`every
`fair
`and
`was
`afforded
`submit
`to support
`documentation
`verdict
`the
`and,
`alternatively,
`court
`issued
`this
`Thus,
`Jenkins'
`cause.
`counsel
`it deemed
`§5704(a),
`
`order
`proposed
`order
`proposed
`made
`court
`in
`argued
`opportunity
`a post-
`to sustain
`a decision
`was
`advised
`it appropriate.
`
`to
`to
`it clear
`Jenkins'
`
`to
`
`the
`
`that
`
`it
`
`«0 L
`~+g
`O §
`--
`O
`~
`O
`
`9
`
`<5
`
`u
`tLt
`
`tu
`+>
`
`O
`
`v
`a.
`
`z
`
`0
`
`
`
`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/06/2018 06:14 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1005
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/06/2018
`INDEX
`NO.
`190219/2016
`
`NYSCEF
`
`DOC.
`
`NO.
`
`1004
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`03/06/2018
`
`Jenkins
`renewal
`emergent
`an
`the
`of
`its appeal
`time
`and money
`for
`sanctions.
`
`Instead,
`reargument/
`annexed
`perfect
`expend
`cross-motion
`disposition.
`
`re-formatted
`to a motion
`affirmation
`Dec.
`
`its
`returnable
`grounded
`14th decision.
`a memorandum
`Both
`the motion
`
`second
`cause
`to show
`order
`proposed
`on February
`2018.
`28,
`Incredibly,
`on
`a looming
`deadline
`of
`its
`own
`This
`left
`no
`plaintiff's
`counsel
`choice
`law
`and
`in opposition
`perforce
`cross-motion
`consolidated
`
`of
`and
`
`are
`
`for
`Jenkins
`
`making
`but
`make
`for
`
`to
`to
`
`a
`
`filing
`
`for
`an
`
`did
`
`court
`reasons
`proffered
`underlying
`1979)(motions
`(1st
`Dept
`to afford
`designed
`misapprehended
`"new"
`material
`and
`capable
`all
`issuance
`
`This
`
`evidence
`were
`the
`
`apprising
`parties'
`the
`
`the
`
`fully
`
`or overlook
`not misapprehend
`14th decision.
`the Dec.
`addressed
`reargument,
`to establish
`a party
`opportunity
`or misapplied
`the
`relevant
`facts,
`verdicts
`evidence
`and
`damages
`(e.g.,
`if any,
`of plaintiffs
`legal
`the
`impact,
`of
`in support
`produced
`of being
`14th
`Jenkins
`Dec.
`decision.
`the
`of
`Illustratively,
`Snowdale
`of
`the
`to take
`judicial
`notice
`court
`submitted.
`post
`verdict
`motions
`were
`
`any
`See
`to the
`that
`
`or
`facts
`Foleyv
`discretion
`the
`court
`
`any
`
`controlling
`in Snowdale,
`death
`the
`after
`Jenkins'
`post-verdict
`could
`verdict
`
`law or mistakenly
`68 AD2d
`Roche,
`of
`the
`court,
`overlooked
`principle
`
`558
`are
`
`of
`
`or
`law).
`as well
`
`The
`as
`
`Andrucki,
`August
`
`2017
`motion
`sent
`at
`
`have
`rendered
`
`verdict)
`well
`before
`a letter
`the
`time
`
`from
`more
`
`court
`"new"
`
`This
`its
`adequate.
`
`adding
`than
`
`unmindful
`is not
`to the
`record
`matter
`Jenkins'
`Nonetheless,
`untimely.
`"new"
`
`that
`
`on
`
`prevented
`which
`was
`motion
`
`Jenkins
`otherwise
`is
`
`orders
`appeal,
`record
`bolstering
`purposes
`of appellate
`various
`exhibits
`annexed
`discussed
`proffered
`and
`Nor will
`dehors
`record.
`support
`Jenkins
`Jenkins'
`
`the
`
`this
`court
`review,
`Dinunzio
`to the
`Jenkins'
`in
`
`this
`now makes
`attempt
`
`for
`
`at
`
`third
`
`Accordingly,
`substantivally
`information
`the
`must
`reject
`Jenkins'
`of
`in support
`affirmation
`and
`post-verdict
`original
`motion),
`with
`arguments
`consider
`new
`court
`Dec.
`the
`time
`in rearguing
`the
`first
`disguised
`a renewal
`reargument
`
`as
`
`its declination
`planned
`its
`appellate
`and
`for
`those
`(i.e,
`never
`motion
`deem same
`alleged
`documentary
`14th decision.
`Accordingly,
`is denied.
`motion
`
`attempts
`the multiple
`despite
`Finally,
`proper
`upon
`predicated
`was
`of which
`documentation
`arguments
`new
`this
`court's
`motion
`practice),
`defendant
`Jenkins
`no
`Bros.,
`would
`The
`better
`practice
`for
`plaintiff's
`cross-motion
`
`and
`
`made
`grounds
`which
`declination
`in its
`choice
`been
`have
`must
`costs
`
`to reargue
`pursuant
`could
`orders
`quixotic
`to file
`denied.
`
`be
`
`none
`
`presenting
`post-verdict
`for
`counsel
`for
`its appeal.
`time.
`Thus,
`
`Dec.
`the
`decision,
`to CPLR
`2221
`(e.g.,
`presented
`have
`been
`8 Co US,
`left Clyde
`to expand
`quest
`reargument
`motion
`
`14th
`
`during
`LLP,
`record
`the
`first
`
`the
`
`its
`
`Accordingly,
`
`it
`
`is
`
`ORDERED
`
`that
`
`Jenkins
`
`Bros.'
`
`motion
`
`is denied;
`
`and
`
`it
`
`is further
`
`ORDERED
`
`that
`
`plaintiff's
`
`cross-motion
`
`for
`
`sanctions
`
`is also
`
`The
`
`foregoing
`
`is this
`
`court's
`
`decision
`
`and
`
`order.
`
`Dated:
`
`March
`
`2, 2018
`
`denied.
`
`C,
`
`Check
`
`Check
`
`one:
`
`O FINAL
`if appropriate:
`
`DISPOSITION
`U DO NOT
`
`POST
`
`NON-FINAL
`
`DISPOSITION
`U REFERENCE
`
`Martin
`
`hulman,
`
`J.S.C.
`
`2 of
`
`2
`
`3 of 3
`
`