In a unanimous decision by the Appellate Division of Manhattan, Judge Shirley Werner Kornreich is believed to be wrong in dismissing claims against defendants who were alleged of adulterating their heating oil products.
In a report by Reuters, an appeal on Tuesday revived the long dismissed cases against Hess Corp and Castle Oil Corp. These corporations are accused of delivering oil products that does not conform to the quality and value that were contracted by New York building owners. Complainants who represented building owners blamed the "adulterated" oil product to be the cause of their heating system's inefficiency which compels them to buy more.
The decision that resulted to a vote of 4-0 brought back the lawsuit thrown off by Judge Kornreich. According to a decision on the Mid Island LP v Hess Corp lawsuit, signed by Kornreich, "It makes little sense to premise an action on the claim that Hess overcharged for its fuel, where plaintiffs apparently burned the fuel without a problem and have not identified how they were disappointed with the product's performance..."
Kornreich' decision also hovered on the idea that those who complained did not know of any defects or difference in the oil that they are receiving until they were informed by their counsel years after receiving the product.
Kornreich, according to Law360, referred to the plaintiff's allegations as "very vague." She also doubted the eligibility of a Consumer Law Claim, stating, "This is commerce among business people. It's not consumers." That is why, Kornreich, "don't see how these are consumer-oriented issues."
As written in Reuters, the current Judge David Saxe said that plaintiffs can pursue damages claims for breach of contract "since we must infer from the complaint that plaintiffs received nonconforming oil deliveries of lesser value than those they contracted and paid for." Opposing the decision of Kornreich, Saxe also dismissed the defense of the accused arguing that the owners waited for too long to pursue some of their claims.
Hess is silent about the matter but legal counsel from Castlerom Holdings Corp, former Castle Corp, stated that the company, "has repeatedly proven that it never blended its products with 'adulterated' or 'waste' oil," and the plaintiffs received heating oil that "complied with all applicable definitions, laws, and regulations."
The cases are BMW Group LLC v Castle Oil Corp, New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 1st Department, No. 16138; and Mid Island LP v Hess Corp in the same court, No. 16139.
