Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Russo v. Keyspan Corp.

Other Lower Courts

January 22, 2008

Edward Russo and Vincent Russo, Plaintiffs,
v.
Keyspan Corp., Keyspan Energy Corp., and Keyspan Gas East Corp., Defendants.

Editorial Note:

This case is not published in a printed volume and its disposition appears in a table in the reporter.

COUNSEL

Reilly, Like Tenety, Esqs. Attorney for the Plaintiffs

John E. Reilly, Esq. Attorney for Defendants

McLane, Fraf, Raulerson Middleton, P.A.

Bruce W. Felmly, Esq. (admitted Pro Hac Vice)

Barry Needleman, Esq. (admitted Pro Hac Vice)

Rachel A. Hampe, Esq. (admitted Pro Hac Vice)

OPINION

Sandra L. Sgroi, J.

ORDERED that the motion of the Plaintiffs Edward Russo and Vincent Russo to reargue and renew a decision of this Court that granted the motion of the Defendants KeySpan Corp., KeySpan Energy Corp., and KeySpan Gas East Corp. to dismiss the action of the Plaintiffs is denied.

Certain facts have not changed since this Court issued its decision on October 26, 2007, granting the motion to dismiss. In this civil action the Plaintiffs seek damages and injunctive relief against the Defendants based upon their alleged exposure to contaminants from the migration of these contaminants in underground plumes. It is alleged that the plumes emanate from a decommissioned manufactured gas plant (hereinafter "MGP") located in Bay Shore, New York. The Bay Shore facility formerly was owned by predecessor corporations of the KeySpan Defendants. This litigation raises issues of public concern because the effect of the plumes on the health, safety and welfare of the persons directly in the path of the contaminants, the real property and natural resources allegedly adversely affected by the pollutants in the plumes and the financial costs involved with remediating the plumes of contaminants that potentially will be borne by all of the ratepayers of KeySpan if those expenses are passed through to the utility's customers.

The Plaintiffs Edward Russo and Vincent Russo own real property located at 1627 Union Boulevard, Bay Shore, New York. According to the Defendants, in May of 2002, representatives from Key Span met personally with Plaintiff Edward Russo on two separate occasions to provide him with environmental data concerning the presence of contaminants on the Plaintiffs' property and to obtain Russo's consent to conduct additional environmental testing at the Plaintiffs' real property. Two KeySpan employees, Theodore Leissing and Joseph Giordano, who were present at this meeting submitted affidavits in support of the prior motion to dismiss wherein it is alleged that at this meeting Edward Russo told the KeySpan representatives that he was a retired LILCO gas plant worker who had performed work at the Bay Shore MGP facility.

At a subsequent meeting held on May 20, 2002, KeySpan, through Giordano, offered to purchase the real property of the Plaintiffs. In July of 2002, at another face to face meeting with Giordano, Russo declined KeySpan's offer to purchase his real property. Russo was informed that KeySpan wished to purchase this property to aid in the remediation efforts. Russo did indicate that he was willing to cooperate with KeySpan to facilitate the remediation of the property in an effort to remove or remediate the contaminants in the soil on the property. Theodore Leissing, the Project Manager at KeySpan Corporation, specifically alleges in his affidavit that in May of 2002 he ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.