TUCSON, AZ–A recommendation to eliminate the liability of New York City and its contractors from claims arising from cleanup of the World Trade Center site is closer to reality after an federal appeals court's ruling, said the president of a captive insurance company.
In February, Mayor Bloomberg released a health report with recommendations mostly focused on health care issues. The recommendations were made by the World Trade Center Health Panel, a group appointed by the mayor in September 2006 to assess the sufficiency of state and federal resources to address ongoing health needs and to ensure maximum coordination between city agencies.
The report recommends reopening the victim's compensation fund, "and coincident with the reopening, that Congress must eliminate the liability of the city and the contractors from claims arising from work at the World Trade Center site," said Christine LaSala, president and chief executive officer of the WTC Captive Insurance Company, formed to protect the city and its contractors from litigation arising from the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. She spoke at the Captive Insurance Companies Association annual conference here.
A federal appeals court, presided by U.S. District Court Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein in Manhattan, ruled that "the City of New York and its contractors are entitled to argue the merits of their appeal that they may be protected from lawsuits arising from the rescue, recovery and debris removal operations at the World Trade Center and other locations following the collapse of the World Trade Center on 9/11," Ms. LaSala said.
A copy of the legal order obtained by National Underwriter from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, dated March 9, read: "Appellants-petitioners, through counsel, move for a writ of mandamus and a stay of the district court proceedings pending appeal. Appellees, through counsel, move to dismiss the appeal docketed under 06-5324-cv. Because it is at least arguable whether some or all of the assertions of immunity put forward by appellants-petitioners have merit, upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion for a stay of trial as well as pre-trial proceedings is GRANTED."
Ms. LaSala said the ruling "is an important step in the pending lawsuits." she explained that the court has agreed that "the appeal should go forward on an expedited basis. Proceedings in the trial court will be halted while the appeal goes forward."
Kenneth Becker, chief, World Trade Center Unit, with the New York City Law Department said in a statement:
"We are pleased that the Second Circuit has decided to consider the merits of the defendants' motion to dismiss litigation brought against the City and its contractors as a result of the 9/11 attacks." He continued that "the Court also ruled the litigation should not go forward until it had decided the motion to dismiss. As we have often said, the existing legal immunities that protect the City and the contractors from potentially enormous liabilities arising from the terrorist attacks must be enforced."
Mr. Becker noted that the City also strongly supports "federal funding to address any WTC-related health conditions, and re-opening the Victim Compensation Fund while protecting the City and its contractors from liability."
The captive is on record supporting the recommendation.
Doing this, Mr. Becker said, would help meet health care needs and "also avoid the necessity of a lengthy litigation where plaintiffs would have to prove that the City and its contractors did something wrong. This would allow prompt reimbursement for those injured and avoid the unnecessary need for two sets of heroes–the workers, and the City and its contractors–to be in conflict."
Ms. LaSala explained that there are currently "8,500 individual plaintiffs, all which are pending." Only one claim, for a broken finger, has been paid, in fall 2004, she said.
In October 2006, Ms. LaSala said, Judge Hellerstein ruled that the immunity laws may apply, "but he did not set any parameters for how they would apply. Those rulings are on appeal today before the second circuit."
She added, "It's probably obvious to say that the defendents in this litigation were very pleased with the second Circuit's ruling. We believe that the immunity motions and the protections they provide need to be heard and evaluated in a way that provides clearer direction from Judge Hellerstein's ruling."
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.