Aegis Ins. Servs. v. 7 World Trade Co., L.P. - 737 F.3d 166 (2d Cir. 2013)

Rule:

It remains the general rule that in common-law negligence actions, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant's conduct was a cause-in-fact of the injury.

Facts:

The 7 World Trade Center Building ("7WTC") stood on the northern edge of the World Trade Center site. As the North Tower collapsed on September 11, 2001, it sent flaming debris spewing into the area around 7WTC. The fiery debris crashed into 7WTC, gouging chunks out of the building. After burning for seven hours, 7WTC collapsed, destroying the electrical substation owned by Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. ("Con Ed") directly underneath the building. Con Ed, along with its insurers, sued the defendants, who designed, built, operated and maintained 7 WTC, alleging in relevant part that the defendants' negligence caused the building to collapse. The district court granted a motion to dismiss brought by a number of defendants involved in the construction of the building, including appellees Tishman Construction Corporation and the Office of Irwin G. Cantor, P.C. The court also granted summary judgment to appellees 7 World Trade Company, L.P., Silverstein Development Corp. and Silverstein Properties, Inc. (together, "7WTCo."), the building's developer and manager. The plaintiffs challenged the decision.

Issue:

Under the circumstances, could the defendants be held liable for the destruction of the building in question?

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court held that although the risk of massive fire at a high-rise building was a foreseeable risk, dismissal was properly granted in a negligence suit regarding the collapse of a particular building against defendants, the entities that designed, built, operated, and maintained the building, because, given the unprecedented nature and magnitude of the constellation of events of September 11, any alleged negligence on the part of defendants was not the cause-in-fact of this building's collapse.