In re New York City Asbestos Litigation (Konstantin/Dummit)

In In re New York City Asbestos Litigation (Konstantin/Dummit), 121 A.D.3d 230 (1st Dept 2014) in addressing consolidation, the court noted that: "Some trial courts have rejected a narrow focus on specific locations of exposures and types of work in favor of an analysis that considers whether two or more plaintiffs were 'engaged' in an occupation related to maintenance, inspection and/or repair and were 'exposed to asbestos in the traditional way, that is, by working directly with material for years.' (see e.g. Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2010 NY Slip Op 33941 [U], 6 (Sup Ct NY Co 2010] (joining cases of residential drywaller, Navy pipefitter, home renovator, plant electrician, powerhouse worker, and Navy electrician for trial, where their injuries 'resulted from 'insulation exposure from boilers, valves, pumps, and other insulated equipment'). Other courts have focused on the types of asbestos product to which the plaintiffs were exposed, and whether they were manufactured and distributed by different defendants (see e.g. Bischofsberger, 2012 NY Slip Op 32414[U])." (Konstantin/Dummit. supra at 242-243)