As we noted in our column on Aug. 31, 2011, the Court of Appeals held an unusual reargument in a tort action against The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey that arose out of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center (WTC). Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman and Judge Robert S. Smith had recused themselves, and argument before the remaining five members of the Court was held on June 1, 2011. Without explanation, the Court availed itself of a procedure permitted by Article VI, Section 2(a) of the State Constitution—to “vouch in” two judges to sit as members of the Court, and ordered reargument. One of those judges, Third Department Presiding Justice Thomas E. Mercure, joined the majority opinion in the decision handed down on Sept. 22, and the other, Second Department Presiding Justice A. Gail Prudenti, joined the three-member dissent.
This month we discuss the decision in the WTC appeal.
Security Risks
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
