### de Alcantara v FANUC Ltd. 2024 NY Slip Op 31096(U) April 1, 2024 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 153424/2020 Judge: Mary V. Rosado Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

Op 30001 (U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New

York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication.INDEX NO. 153424/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/02/2024

1 of 5 PRESENT: 

### SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY HON . MARY V. ROSADO PART Justice 33M

-·································- · · · ·-··· -·-··· ·--·-----·--- ·· · - · ·· ··-··X INDEX NO. 1534 2 4 /202 0 NIDIA LOR A DE ALCANTARA , R I CARDO ALCANTARA , Pl a i n tiff ,

- V . FA NU C LTD ., FANU C COR P ORAT ION , FANUC AMER IC A CORPORAT I ON , FANUC ROB O T I CS CORPORAT I ON , FA NUC EDM CORPOR ATI ON , M ETH ODS MACH I NE T OO LS, INC .• F ARMINGTON MACH I NE TOOLS , L LC D e f enda n t.



### ··-·· - ·-··-· -- · --· · ·- - ····- ······ · ···· · ···· ·· ·······-------X MOTION DATE 12 / 02/20 23 MOTION SEQ. NO. 2 DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION

T he following e•fi le d doc u ments, l i sted by NYSCEF doc u ment numbe r (Mot io n 002) 3 7, 38 , 39 , 4 0 , 4 1 , 4 2,4 3 , 44 , 45 , 46, 4 7 , 4 8 , 49 , 5 0 , 52, 53 , 54 , 55, 56, 57 , 58, 59, 60, 6 1 , 62, 63, 64 , 65 , 66, 67 , 68 , 69 , 7 0, 71 , 72 we re rea d on th i s mot i on t o /for SUMMARY J UDGMENT (A FTER JO I NDER) Upon the fo r ego ing d ocum e nts, and a ft er oral arg u ment, which t ook place on Oc t ober 3 , 2023 , w her e Marissa D . Geyer, Es q. ap peared on b eha lf of th e p l a i ntiff\ N id i a Lo ra de ,\lcantara and R ic ardo A lcantara, Yelena Graves, Esq. a p p eare d on heh a l f of Defendant, FANUC Amer ica Cor poration (''FAC"), a nd Anthony Bianchi, Esq. appe ared on b eha lf of Defenda nt, Me t hods M ac h i ne T oo l s In c. , FAC's mmion for an ord er for summ ary j u dg ment d is mi s s ing all cl a ims and cro s s • claims against i t , i s d enied. Background I n this p rodu c t l ia bi li ty action, N id ia Lorn d e A lcanta ra alleg es t hat s he was in j ured at work on Apri l 28 , 2017, w h i le operating a FANUC Robodrill a t Putnam Prec i sio n Products , fo e. ( "Put n am " ) (NY S CEF Docs. 3 9 , 4 8 ) . Ms. A lcantara's hu sband , Ricardo Alcantara (Mr . and Ms Alcantara, collec ti vely " P lai nti ff") b rought a de r ivati ve c au se of actio n for dam ag e s . In the fi rs t cause of action, Plaintiff claims th a t all Defendants are str ictly lia ble b ecau se t he F A NUC R ob o dri ll was "dangerous an d defective " in its d esign an d m anufacture and co nt ained in ade quate warnings (NY SCE F Doc. 1 ). 153424/2020 L ORA DE A L CANTARA, NI DIA ET AL vs. FANUC L TD . ET AL Motion No. 002 Pago 1 of 5 

### [* 1]INDEX NO. 153424/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/02/2024

2 of 5 The second ca u se o f ac ti on all eg es neg l ig en ce on the par t of all Defendants in tha t I .he in

j ur ies " wer e caus e d sole ly throu gh t he fault , neg ligenc e and cu lpab le conduct' ' o f t he D e fen d ant s (NYSCEF D oc . I ) . T he Co m p l a in t d id no t allege an y sep arate ba s i s for neg l igence o t her than the defec t ive desi gn, m anufac t uring, an d warni ng s. T he t hird cau s e o f action alleg es breach o f " alt warranties " made i.n connection wi th t he F anuc R o b o dri ll (NY SC EF Doc . I ). P l a inti 

### ('f's also nam e d FAN UC Ltd . , FANUC Co rporati on, 

### f ANUC Robo t ics Corporati on , an d FANUC ED M Cor poratio n as Defendants, but ne ver serve d th e s e e nti ti es. Parti es' Cont e ntion s FA C seeks summar y j ud gmen l d ismi ss ing t he comp lai nt and crnss-cla im of Met hods M achi n e T oo l s , Inc . (" Metho d s") fo r common l aw inde mn i Ii cati on an d contr ib ut ion be cause it w a s n o t i n t he c ha in of d i s t r i butio n of t h e Rob o dr i ll in vo l ved in t he ac c id e nt. FAC as s e rts t hat it did no t d esign , man ufac ture , purchase , distr ib ute , s up p l y , sell or se r v ic e th e sub ject Ro bodr i ll an d , as suc h, cannot be held liable under theories of s t r i ct pro du cts lia bili t y or b r each of war ran ties a s a matl er o fla w (NYSCEF Docs. 38, 39, 4 9) . In o p p os iti on , Me t hods c lai m s t hat the motion s h ou l d b e d en ie d in i ts entirety pu rsuan t t o CPLR § 32 1 2(f), with o ut leave to r enew, s i nce the m ot io n i. s prematur e d ue t o substan ti a l , m a t e ri a l an d nec es sar y o utstan d ing di s co very, i n clud ing responses to P lai n tiff s Notice for D isc over y an d I ns pect ion and Interrogatories date d S eptem b e r 2, 2022, and d ep o s iti o ns o f a lt partie s an d no n- pa rty w it ne sses (NYSCEF Doc . 5 3) . Add iti onally, per the P re li mi nary Conferenc e Or der of this Cour t date d S ep t em b er I, 2022 , FAC wa s t o p roduc e a wi t ness for a d epos iti on on Jan u ary 1 9 , 2023 . Ins te ad , FAC s ubm ille d on l y t h e Affi d a vi t 

## o r it s Vic e P re s id ent. l\fo lhods argues t hat th e o uts tan di ng d i scovery must b e comp le t e d prior to F i\C seeking summary ju d gment since is s ue s ra i sed i n th e i ns t an t mo ti on r e qu ire i n forma ti on that i s wi thi n t he ex clu s ive kn ow ledge or p o s sess ion of other parties.

1 5342412020 L ORA DE ALCAN TAR A , NIDIA ET A L vs . FA N UC LT D. ET AL Moti on No. 002 Pa go 2 of 5 

### [* 2]INDEX NO. 153424/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/02/2024

3 of 5 

### Methods a lso p oin ts t o an online p re ss relea se, dated Dece mber 17, 2013 , on Defenda nt Fi\ C 's webs i te armoun c ing that FANUC ha d m erged all of it s operations in the A m eri c as into a sing l e compa n y named FANUC Amer ica Corporation (NYSCEF Doc . 59 ). Th ere fore, further disco very is needed to ex plo re whether FANIJC Fi\ America Corpor a tio n is anot her na m e for. or a p r ede cess or com p any t o, FAC wh ic h would p lac e FAC in 1h e chain of distri butio n (NYSCEF Doc. 53). M

e tho ds see ks ad d it ional fac ts through discov ery, i ncl u d in g w h ether FAC, as the successor entity of FANUC Robo ti cs Cor p oratio n and/or FANUC E DM Corporation , c a n be foun d to have distribu te d, s uppl ie d , so ld an d /o r ser vi ce d Robodrills p ri or t o Plai nti ffs acci d ent. Method asse 1 ts t hat questi ons of fa ct ex is t as to the functional uni ty an d contro l be t we e n FAC an d Fan u c Corporation f /k/ai Fanuc Ltd . and that discove r y is n ee d ed to exp lore any control , supervision an d /o r manageme nt th at Fi\C may hav e exer cised over t h

e operati ons o f FA NUC Corp. in the Americas prior to th e accident, or w hether a prin c i pa l/agent r elati onship existed (NY SC EF Doc 5 3 ). Standard 

### T he prop onent of a summary j udgme n t motion m ust make a prima

### Ji1cie s ho wing of entitlement to j ud gme n t as a ma ller of law, t en deri n g s uffi cient evidence to e lim i nate a n y material is s u es of fa ct fr om th e case (Winegrad v N ew York U niv. Med. Ctr . , 

### 64 NY2d 851 , 8 53 [ 1985]; Alva re z v Prospect Hosp . , 

### 68 NY2 d 320, 3 24 [1986]). F a i l ure lo make a prima(<1 c ie 

### showi ng re qu ire s a denia l of th e mo ti on, r eg ardles s of the s u flicienc y of t he oppos ing papers (Id. ) 

### The mov ing part y ' s " burden i s a he a vy one " and the " fa cts mus t be viewed in th e li ght most favo rab l e to the n on-moving party " (Jacob sen v New York Cit y Health and Hosps. Corp., 

### 22 NY3 d 824, 833 [ 201 4 '1) . Once th is show ing i s made, the bu rde n shif ts t o the opposing palty to p rod uc e cv iden ti ary proof , i n admiss i b l

e form, suffic ie nt t o estab l is h the existence of mater ia l issues of fac t whi ch r equ i r e a tri a l o f'l he acti o n" (Alvarez 

### at 324; 7.u ck e rman v City <!f'New York, 

### 49 NY2d 153424 /2020 LORA DE A L CANTARA, NIDIA ET AL vs. FANUC L T D. ET AL Motion No . 002 Page 3 of 5 

### [* 3]INDEX NO. 153424/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/02/2024

4 of 5 557 ,562 l 1 980]; Vega v Res rani Co n s t. Corp . , 1 8 l\Y3 d 49 9 , 503 [20 1 2 ]) . S ummary judg men t i s a dras tic r e medy an d s h o ul d no t be g ranted w he r e there is a ny d oub t as lo the ex i stence o f a t ri ab le i s sue of fact (Roruha Ertruders, Inc . v Ceppos , 4 6 N Y2d 2 2 3,23 1 [ 1 978]) . Me r e co nclusion s, speculat i on , or unsu bstantiat ed asserti ons are in suffi cien t t o d efeat a motion for sununary j u dg me nt (:t, uck er

man at 562; Butler -F ra n ci s v Ne w York Ci t y l /ous . Awh . , 38 AD3 d 433 , 434 [1s t Dept 2007 ]) . Discussion 

### CPLR § 3212(f) perm its den i a l of a summa r y j udg m ent m o! ion as p rem a ture , and t he non m o vant t o have furt her d i scover y , when i t app ea rs that "fa cts essent ial to just ify oppos it ion may e xi st but cannot then be s tated" (Sapp v 

### S.J. C 308 Lenox A ve. Family Ltd Partnership , 1 50 AD 3d 52 5 , 527 

## fl st Dep t 2 0 16 

### J). T o avai l o nese l f of 

### CPLR § 32 l 2(f), a party must d emons t rate that the needed proof i s w ithi n the ex c lusi ve know ledge of t h e moving pa r t

y, t h at t h e claim s in o p pos i ti on are su p p orted by someth ing other th an mere hope or con j e ct u re, an d t hat t h e party h as at leas t made some attempt to disco ve r fa ct s al v ariance with the m ovi ng pa rty's proof (Voluto Ventures. 

### LLC v Jenk ens 

### & Gilchris t Pa r ker Chapin LLP, 44 AD3d 557 (1s t Dep t 2007] [intern a l ci t ations om it t e d ]) . !\ g rant o f summary j udg me n t c a nno t h e avo ide d by a c lai me d nee d for d i scovery u n l ess some evident.iar y bas i s is offered to sugges t t hat disco v e ry m ay lead to rele vant ev iden c e (13ai ley v New Y or k C ity T r . Au t h . , 270 AD 2 d 15 6, 157 l I s t Dep t 2000 ]) . ]( is cle ar , however, that a p arty should b e perm i tte d a reasona b le o p p o rtun ity for dis closure prio r to t he determ i natio n of a s u mmary judgmen t mo tio n ( Boy er v New York P rop . In s . Un derwri t ers Ass'n, 90 J\D2d 737 , 738 [ I s t De p t I 9R2J ). In l ight of t he inc omp lete sta le of discovery, inclu ding the fac t t hat no p arty has ye t b een d e po sed . t h e summary jud g m en t moti on i s prem at ur e (W i ls on v Yemen Realty Corp. , 74 AD3d 54 4 , 545 1 1 s t De p t 20 I O J) . Pl a in t iff is enti t led to comp lete d i scovery in t h eir effort to estab li sh t he prec i se relationsh ips among t he vari ous

15342412 020 LORA DE A L CANTARA , NID I A ET A L vs . FANUC LTD . ETAL Mot i on No . 002 P age 4 of 5 

### [* 4]INDEX NO. 153424/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/02/2024

5 of 5 FAJ\ llJ C enti ti es a n d thei r relationsh ip to F AC . Significantly, t his inform ati on i s so lely wi th in the control of<lefen<lants (Cu rr y v Hundreds of H

a ts, Inc. , 146 A.D3d 593,594 L i s t Dep t 20 17 ]) . A c cordingly, i t is ORD ERE D t hat D e C en dant FA NUC America Corp .' s motion for an orde r fo r summa ry j udgment dismissing all claim s an d cross - claim s against i t, i s d enied; a nd i t i s fu1ther ORDERED t hat on or hefore Ap ri l 5 , 2024, t h e a c ti ve par ties shall s ubm it a prop osed p r

e l im in ar y confe r enc e order via e-ma i l t o SPC- P a1 t33- C lerk @?.ny c ou1ts . g ov . If thc parti es arc unable to agree t o a proposed p re limi nar y con fe renc e o rd er , th e p a rtie s are dir e cte d 1 0 a p p ea r for an in- p e rso n pre li m i nary c o nfere nc e on A p r i l 17, 2 024 at 9:30 a . m . i n Room 442, 6 0 C e ntre S treet , New Yo rk , Ne w Y o r k ; and i t i s fu r ther 

### ORDER E D t hat wi t h in ten d ays o f entry, coun se l fo r Defend an t FANUC A m e r ic a Corp. s h a ll serve a co p y of th i s Dec i s ion an d O r <ler wi t h notice of en t ry on all p a 1

ti es t o this ac tion; and it is fur th er 

### ORDER E D that t he C le r k of th e Cour t i s d ir e cted l.o enter j udgment acco rd i ngl y. Th i s co nstitu te s t he Decision and Orde r o f t h e cour t.

4/1/2 0 24

DATE ARY V . ROSADO, J . S . C . CHECK O NE :

APP LI CATIO N : CHECK I F APPROPRIAT E: CASE D I SPOSED GRA ,N T EO S E TT LE ORDER 

# 0 DEN I ED

IN C LUDE S T R ANSFER/REASSIGN X NON - F I NAL D I SPOS I T ION GRANTED I N P ART SUBM I T OR DER FI D U C I ARY APP O I N T MEN T

153424 12020 LORA DE ALCANTARA, N I D I A E T AL vs . FANUC LTD . E T AL Motion No . 002

## □ OTHER

### □ R EFE R ENCE

Page 5 o f 5 

### [* 5]