Deutsche Bank loses 2 in court.

The City is not responsible to Deutsche Bank for $500 million in damages related to the World Trade Center attacks, said a federal judge who dismissed two of the bank's lawsuits last week.

In two complaints, Deutsche Bank claimed the City was responsible for damages to its 40-story office building at 130 Liberty St. that sits at the perimeter of ground zero. Both complaints were dismissed by Federal District Judge Alvin Hellerstein.

Deutsche Bank was dealt another legal blow last week when a New York Supreme Court Justice denied its request to expedite its lawsuit against two insurers, Allianz and AXA, that it claimed was holding up the redevelopment of ground zero by refusing to settle a claim on 130 Liberty Street property.

The building was severely damaged when it was struck by debris falling from the South Tower of the World Trade Center after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Deutsche Bank also claimed damages to property it owned at 4 Albany St. and property it leased at 4 World Trade Center in its lawsuit against the City.

"We are pleased the Court has dismissed Deutsche Bank's complaints," said Michael A. Cardozo, New York City corporate counsel. "We believe these complaints have absolutely no factual or legal merit."

"Even if Deutsche Bank decides to re-plead some of its claims, we will continue to vigorously oppose any effort by the company to blame New York City for damages that were, in fact, caused by the terrorists who attacked the World Trade Center--not by the City, who itself was also a victim."

In the lawsuits, Deutsche Bank claimed that the City had been negligent in its inspection, occupancy and control of 1, 2, 4 and 7 World Trade Center. The complaint had charged that the negligence included improper placement of diesel fuel tanks in 7 World Trade Center which, Deutsche Bank argued, exploded and caused 7 WTC's collapse, resulting in a dust and debris plume that damaged the Bank's building. Deutsche Bank also claimed that the City's alleged negligence in the recovery and cleanup efforts in the "Frozen Zone" around the site after the attacks caused extensive damage to its property.

Judge Hellerstein dismissed the fuel-tank related charge, saying that the bank did not include the charge in its preliminary findings. While he also dismissed the claim of negligence against the City, Hellerstein ruled that Deutsche Bank could re-plead the case, but would have to prove that a "special relationship" existed between the bank and the city, in which the city agreed to act on the bank's behalf.

The Court held that the plaintiffs had failed to allege any facts showing that the City owed the plaintiffs a "duty of care by reason of a special relationship," a requirement for suing a municipality for negligence in the performance of a governmental function.

Last month, Deutsche Bank, filed another lawsuit against two insurance carriers, Allianz and AXA, to demolish the building that was damaged in the attacks, saying it was too contaminated to be re-occupied.

In it's August 11 court complaint, the bank accused the two insurance companies of holding up the development of the World Trade Center by not agreeing to pay half of the $1.7 billion that the bank is seeking in damages. Two other insurers have already paid $1 billion.

The insurers denied the allegations in court and claimed Deutsche Bank is holding up the process by seeking an over "inflated settlement" and that the building can be reoccupied and renovated.

Last week, New York Supreme Court Justice Richard Lowe denied the bank's request for an expedited trial.

Deutsche Bank refused to comment on the lawsuits or it's legal proceedings against Allianz and AXA.

The insurers have also invoked a clause in their contracts that permits disputes over cost of damage to be settled through an appraisal conducted by a three-member panel.