NY court weighs immunity claim in '93 WTC bombing
Legal News Center
The agency that owned and operated the World Trade Center urged the state's top court Wednesday to reject remaining negligence claims for the 1993 bombing by terrorists who detonated a van of explosives in the public garage beneath its twin towers, killing 6 people and injuring about 1,000.
In lawsuits citing security concerns since 1984, a jury found that the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey failed as a landlord to maintain reasonably safe premises and was 68 percent at fault, blaming the terrorists for the other 32 percent. A midlevel court upheld the verdict.
In arguments Wednesday, attorney Richard Rothman said the Court of Appeals should uphold the Port Authority's claims of governmental immunity for its counter-terrorism measures against what was an unprecedented event, a foreign terrorist attack on the U.S. In court papers, he noted that the FBI building in Washington, D.C., and the New York Police Department headquarters and the United Nations building, both in Manhattan, all had unrestricted underground parking at that time against what was regarded as a relatively low-level threat.
Rothman said the 110-story towers housed offices for the governor and several state and federal agencies, and the Port Authority was doing security assessments across its network, including airports. "Treating the Port Authority as just another landlord ... is directly contrary to the statutes under which the World Trade Center was created," he said.
Even if regarded under the law as a commercial landlord, Rothman argued it was likewise undisputed that authority officials had many high-level meetings about security and were in touch with federal authorities before the bombing. The twin towers were destroyed on Sept. 11, 2001, when jetliners hijacked by terrorists flew into them.
Related listings
-
Court to clarify witness identification rules
Legal News Center 05/31/2011The Supreme Court will decide whether a witness identification of a man suspected in a break-in of a car should be thrown out. The high court on Tuesday agreed to hear an appeal from Barion Perry, who is in prison for breaking into a car in 2008. A w...
-
Gov. Rick Perry signs tort reform bill into law
Legal News Center 05/30/2011Gov. Rick Perry signed into law Monday a measure that will limit frivolous lawsuits by levying some fees on plaintiffs and allowing meritless suits to be dismissed early in the process. Perry designated the "loser pays" bill a top priority of the leg...
-
Fugitive Russian lawmaker living in Beverly Hills
Legal News Center 05/29/2011A sensational dispute between Moscow billionaires with a storyline that rivals Hollywood has spilled across international borders: Surveillance photographs showed a fugitive Russian lawmaker living in Beverly Hills, California. Someone tried to hack ...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.