On November 17, 2025, New York State Supreme Court, Suffolk County, issued a broad ruling requiring the defendants in the asbestos matter Colbree v. Amchem to disclose insurance-related information during the early stages of litigation. The decision is unusual because New York courts managing asbestos litigation have generally avoided making sweeping rulings regarding the disclosure of insurance information. In Colbree, however, the Court’s decision was predicated on statutory interpretation rather than the particular facts of the case, signaling a new approach to asbestos litigation in Suffolk County.
New York law, as codified in CPLR 3101(f), generally requires the automatic disclosure of insurance information within 90 days of filing an answer to a complaint. However, given the unique complexities of asbestos litigation, many New York courts have opted not to strictly enforce the rule and instead have adopted local procedures for handling the disclosure of insurance information. The plaintiffs in Colbree argued that they were entitled to the insurance information because the law is unambiguous and the 90-day statutory deadline had passed. The defendants maintained that premature disclosure of insurance information would lead to complications that might stall settlement negotiations, among other concerns, and undermine the Court’s previously stated goal of ensuring the fair and inexpensive resolution of asbestos-related cases.
The Court agreed with the plaintiffs, finding no exception to CPLR 3101(f)’s insurance-disclosure provisions for asbestos-related matters. The Court noted that the statute does include an exception for motor-vehicle insurance and that the New York State Legislature could have, but did not, include a similar exception for asbestos litigation.
It remains to be seen how this ruling will influence arguments over insurance disclosures in New York’s other judicial districts, though plaintiffs will undoubtedly cite this decision in future filings. Accordingly, defendants in asbestos and/or talc cases should be aware of the Colbree decision and prepare for a potential increase in motion practice related to insurance disclosure.
If you are involved in asbestos or talc litigation and have questions about how this decision may affect your proceedings, please be in touch with a partner in the firm’s Insurance Recovery, Litigation and Counseling group or either of the authors, Sara Schaeffer-Roth or Leroy Foster.