Aegis Insurance Services, Inc. v. 7 World Trade Co., L.P.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
737 F.3d 166 (2013)
- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
As a result of terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City collapsed. When the North Tower collapsed, debris crashed into the 7 World Trade Center Building (7WTC). The collapse of the Twin Towers also destroyed the water supply in the area. Fires burned on multiple floors of the 7WTC. Once the 7WTC was evacuated, the New York City Fire Department ceased its efforts to extinguish the fires in order to create a safe zone around the building to prepare for its collapse. The Fire Department made this decision because of the lack of lives at risk in the building, the lack of a water supply, and to try to prevent additional deaths of firefighters. Seven hours later, the 7WTC collapsed. This collapse destroyed an electrical substation under the building that was owned by Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. (Con Ed) (plaintiff). Con Ed sued the designers and builders of the 7WTC (defendants), alleging that the defendants’ negligence caused the 7WTC to collapse. Con Ed alleged that the building standards required the 7WTC to be able to withstand partial, local damage without collapsing. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants, ruling that defendants did not owe a duty to Con Ed. Con Ed appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pooler, C.J.)
Dissent (Wesley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
