### Cerros v New York City Tr. Auth. 2024 NY Slip Op 30319(U) January 29, 2024 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 153784/2021 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.

## FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/29/2024 05:01 PM INDEX NO. 153784/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 117 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/29/2024

1 of 6 

### SUPREME COURT OF THE 

### STATE OF NEW YORK !N ' EW YORK COUNTY PRESENT : ' HON .. MARY V. ROSADO Justice

- ---- ---- -- -------------- -------- -- -------- ---- - ----- .. ---X

M A U RICIO CERROS, ENMA CERROS, Pl a i nti ff ,



### - vNEW YORK CITY TRANS I T AUTHORI TY , METROPOLITAN TR ANSPORTATION AUTHOR I TY , TH E CffY O F NEW YORK, TUL LY CONS TR UC TI ON CO . INC . , WALSH CONS TRU CTION COMPANY I I, LlC , FEILDMAN L UMBER-US lBM, LI LC , Defendant.

- - -------- - ------- --· - --------------- - ----- ----------- - ------ - ----- X N EW YOR K cn Y T RANSIT AUTHORI T Y, M ETRO POLI TAN TR A N SPORTAT I ON AU THOR lTY , T HE CITY OF NEW YORK Plai n t i ff , -against- 'FELDMAN LUMBE R - US LBM , LLC De fen dant. H•----- -. ------------ -·- ---- ---------------- - ~ ----------- -~--• . X PART 33M I NDEX NO . 1 53784/2021 MOT I ON DATE 11 /' 01 /2 023 MOTION S!::Q, NO . -'- 0 ~

03

"----- -
DECISIONi + ORDER ON MOTION

T hird-Pa rty I ri dex No. 5 95 079/20 2 3

The following e-fi le d doc umen ts , li sted b y NYSCEF do cumen t n u m be r (Mot ion 003) S - 5, 86, 87, 88 , 89 1 , 90, 91 , 92 , 93 , 94, 95 , 96, 97 , 98 , 99, 00, 101, 02 , 103 , 107, 108, 1 09, 1 10, 1 2 , 1 3 , 114, 11S were rea d ori this motion t o/for AMEND CAPTIONIP LE ADIJNGS Upon t h e : fc.>regoing 

### documen t s Plainti ffs Mauricio Cerros ( " Mauric io' ;) an d Fnma Cerros' 

### (''P lai n tif fa") motion fo r an Order 

### granting P l aintiffs ' 

### motion for leave to fi le an d 

### s , erve a first 

### amen de d complaint is granted. I. Ba. ckground and 

### Procedura l History laiJ 1li ff :tv 1aurfo i o 

### alleges that while • employed b ' \V a.lsh Cons truct ion Company 11 , LLC (" \Val s.h ' ), he 

### ,vas performing v,, :ork on the New York City 

### T ·ansit Authority /J\, fotro polita n Trans po r tati on 

### Au tho ri t y Floo d 1 itigation and Res i l"ency Proj c,ct (the ·'Train Yard ' ) 

### \vhen, " a fter 1 53784/202 1 CERROS, MAURICIO vs. NEW YORK . CITY "l" RANSIIT Motion ' No. 003 Page 1 o, f 6 

### [* 1]

## FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/29/2024 05:01 PM INDEX NO. 153784/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 117 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/29/2024

2 of 6 removi ng s rap s from a sta ck o f lumbe r that w as improperly pb c e d and had no t been properly s eemed the st ack of lumber colla pse d a.nd fell down onto Pla intiff, causing h i m serious p hys i ca l injuries" {N YSCEP Do c . . 1 al~ 5) . Plaintiff s commence d the i ns tan t act i o n against Defen d ants New Yo rk City T ransit Au thori ty ("NYCTA ") , Melro polit an T ransportation Aut hori ty (''MTA'') ~ The 

### City of Nt:\ York

''T C NY' ' ), 

### Tu lly Constmction Co . ln c. ('Tu ll y"}, an d \Valsh Cons t mc tion Com p any 11, LLC (' W alsh") 

### by filing and se r v i ng a Summons and Complaint dated A p r il 19 , 2021 (N YSC EF Doc . 88) . issue was j o ine d 

### by t he s ervice of an Ans\ v er 

### b y Defend ants YCTA ~ MIA and TC N Y d ated J u 1t: 4 , 2 021 . (NY "'CEF Do c . 99) . In lieu of answ , eri n g, D efen dants TuUy an d Wa lsh file d a mo lion 

### to djsmiss on Ju n e ] 5 2 021 (NYSCEF Doc . 9) . Plairrtjffs ' ac ti on agains t TuUy an d Wal sh 

### ,1>,• as la ter d is continued withou t p r ej u di ce pursuan t to a S ti p u la tion o f Di s c on tinu a nce date d Septembe r 20, 2021 (NYSCEF Doc . 9 0). On January 26, 2023, Defen d ants NYCT · , 1 TA an d ' I C Y (th e 'Third- Par ty Plaintiff s" ) commenced a th ird-part y ac tion agai nst Fe ldm an Lumb er~ US L RM , LLC ( 'Fel d man") (N YSC EF Do c. 37) . F ~1dma n is a l um ber y ar d in 

### t J1e 

### Ci ty 

# or N c \v Yo rk t hat p r,ovi d es mater ial s t o var i ous in d i v i d ua ls and entit ies t h r oughout the Ci ty of N e,v 

### York and , i n th i s 

### cas e , p r ov1 d ed materia l s to W al8 h at the rain Yard 

### (NY SC E F Doc .. l 07 

### al 

### I 3 ) . Sub s equen tl y. P laintiffs c omme nce d a se p arate a cti on against · e l dman un d er ln d ex N o . I 5 0588 / 2023 (t he 

### ' Separate Ac ti on ') 

### by filing an d s rv ing a Stunmon::; an d 

### Vcr i . fi e d Co mp la in t dated J an uary 

### l 9 , 2023 (N
-SCEF Doc . 89) . Issue vvas j oine d b y 

### Fel dma 1 i n th e S ep arat e 

### Acti on 

### by servi c e or an Answer d ate.cl Feb rua r y 27 : 2023 ( NYSCEF Doc. 1 02) . hereafter, th e Sep arate Action w as conso li date d i nto t hi s ac t.io n by Decision an d O ·J. er da te d Jun e 1 , 2023 

### {NYSCEF Doc. 73) .

1 .

5 3 1 84/202:1 , CERROS , MAUR I C IO v s. N EW YORK CITY lRA N Sff Motion No. 003 Page 2 of 6 

### [* 2]

## FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/29/2024 05:01 PM INDEX NO. 153784/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 117 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/29/2024

3 of 6 

### Plaintiffs commence d a th1 rd action (the "Th ir d Act ion") 

### by Sununons and Comp laint da t e d Octob er 30, 2023 (Exhi bi t B to NY SCE F Doc . 98), asse rting claims; 

### inter alia, ag ainst the po ssi b le manufacturers and dist1'ibutors o f t he subj e ct draft o flumbe r , sounding in strict products liab i lit y, bre ach o hvarranty and neg ligence (NYSCEF · ) oc. 86 at 

## i i 1 5). Plainti ffs inten d lo 

### move to c onso lida t e the Third Action vviU1 lhc instant action {NYSC F Doc . 86 at ' 3) . On Novem b e r 1, 2023; Piaintiffs made the i n stan t motion 

### C1ot Seq. 3) (N'YSC E F Doc. 85 ) fm an O rd er grant ing Plain Li ffs 

### le ave to fi le an d serve a F irs l Am e nded Co np laint (N 

### YSCEF Do c. 98) ad ding claims agains t 

### Fddm an for strict pro ducts lia bi lity and b reach ofwarranly, as well as an ad dit iona l claim of negligence ag ainsl all defen d ants . . Fe ldman file d an Affim1ation in Op[ os ition 

### to P l ainti.ffs' 

### mo tio n dated November 22, 2023 ( YSCEF Doc. 107). P l ai 1ti ffs filed a Rep ly Affirmat ion in supp01t 

# or the ir motion dated Jan u ary 2, 20 24 (NYSC F Doc. 1 1 2). IT. 

### Di.scH siori .l\. . 

### Standard Leave t o amend pleadings ls 

### fredy granted i n th e ab sence 

### or pr e j udice 

### if the pro posed amen dment is not palpa b ly insu ffici ent as a matter of la w 

### (lv fa s hink sy v 

### Drescher, 188 A.D3 d 465 [ 1 st De pt 2020)). A par t_.1 opposing a motion to 

### amend must d emonstrate t hat it 

### \Vou ld be substant i al ly prejud iced by 

### the amen dmen t , or th e amendmen t s are putently devo id of merit 

### (Gree nbu rgh 

### Eleven Union Free School Di s t . V National Un.ion fire Ins . . Co., 298 AD2 d 180 , 1 8 1 

## ll st Dept 2002

### J) . . Del ay alone is no t sufficient to deny lea ve to amend 

### (Johnson v 

### lWon te jlore A1edical Center, 20~ AD3d 46 2 

### [ l st D "p t 202 2 ]). B. Plaintiffs Fa ilure l o 

### Include an Affid avi t of l v

forit is not 1 :atal to t heir Mo t ion Preliminaril y, Fe ldm an cont• ends t hat P laintiffs' mo ti on mus t be d en ied be cau se Pla intiff.<; have fa iled to sub mit an affid a vit of me rit in support of the a pplication to 

### amer d YSCEF Doc .

1 5376412021 CER IROS MAUR 11C ! IO vs.. NEW YORK C ITY TR ANS IT Page J of 6 Motion No . 00 3 

### [* 3]

## FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/29/2024 05:01 PM INDEX NO. 153784/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 117 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/29/2024

4 of 6 

### W 7 at 17 ) . Specifica ll y, Fd dm an c i tes to 

### Schulty Roth 

### & Za bel v. Ka sov er, 28 A.D. 3 d 4 0 4 ; 812 N. Y.S.2d 874 (1 st Dep t. 2006 ) in suppor t of the assertion 

### that iTa ] ] though t he s tand a rd for a mending a p le ad.in g i s less exac ti n g th a n in mov in g for summary judgment, t he r e st i ll must b e an A f fi d avit of 

### Me1 i t or an offer of evi d ence s imitar to t ha t su p p ort ing a summary j udgment motion.· • Ilo v,.:eve r , mo r e recent decisions by the F i s t Departme nt have 

### he ld) convers ely , t hat on a motion for leave to amend p le adings, a p laint iff is · · not re q ui re d to su ppo rt it s all egations \vi t h evidence or an aff i d av it of meri t" 

### (St. . 

### 1 V

icholas J·V 

### 126 l, . 

### P . v R epublic Inv. Co. . LLC. l 03 

### A03d 4 88 , 48 8 ~ 4 89 [ }s t De pt 202 I J). As such, P lai nli ITs' failure to subm i t an affid a vit o f me rit 

### is. not fata l t > thei r n10 tio n 

### ror leav e to file a fi rs t am e n de d com p la int. C. P la inti ffs) Motion for L e.a ve to File a First i\.mend e d Com 

### tai nt i s Granted As stat e d ab ove, to successfu lly op p os e a motion lo a.mend p l ea d ings a party must de mon str ate t hat i t w ould be substan tia lly pre j ud ic e d 

### hy t he ame n d men t, or th at the amendments are p ate n tly de vo id o f me ri t 

### (Gr ee n burgh Eleven Union Free School Dist. V National Union Fire I ns. Co . • 29 8 A D2d 180 , 181 [ 1 st D ep t 2002 ] } . 

### Fe ld.man 1 s oppo s i ti on fafls t o de mo n s t r ate or as se rl that 

### g ranting P la intiffs' m otion 

### for lea v e to fil e a fir st am e nded c. orn plaint wou ld b e 

### pre j ud icial to Feldm an 

### in any 

### v,.: ay (NYSC EF D0 1,:. l 07). Fe ld man's prima ry a rgu me nt i n op p os i tio n, wi t h resp ect to th e p roduct Ea b il i t y c.laim in cluded in P lai ntiffs' H rst .A. : mended Compla i nt, is t hat Plaint iffs have " no t s,c t fo rth a s ingle bas is in s u p ort o f 

### r t1 1e ir] a pplicatio n to 

### amend th e mm 

### pla int as th en:: has been no tes ti mony tha lherc \vas any . iss u e with t he stack of lum be r t hat fe ll on to the p l a ' ntiff o ther than fallin ~ o ver d ue to vi b ration from the near by p i le dri v ing ac tivi ti e s" ( YSC LP Doc . 107 at 

## i i 14) . I fo \veve r ; Plai nti ffs' claim in th 1; Fi rst Amended Complai nt i s i' not t h at the i n d ividu al p ieces o f 3x 1 Ox 1 6 lu m b er were defcc t1ve , " but ra t h er that 

### "'t he suhjec t 

### d raft of lumber c olle c tively as manu factu re d v,d th a ll of it s

15J784f2021 , CERROS , MAUR I C I O vs . NEW YORK C ITY iRANS'IT Motion No . 003 !Pag: o 4 of 6 

### [* 4]

## FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/29/2024 05:01 PM INDEX NO. 153784/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 117 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/29/2024

5 of 6 

### component parts - 1nclud ing defecti ve du nnage whi c h was insuffi cient l o 

### sup po rt an d stab il ize th e dra ft
- · was defective as manufactured, ei the r in its design and/or manufactme and/or 

### fa i lure to warn ; 1 

### (N SYC EF Do c_ 98 at 

## ~ I i i 90 -102) . P lai ntiffs' B ill of Particu l ar s s p ecifically alleges , 

### inter alia 

### th at Feldman us • ed im proper and defe ctive dunnage, failed to us • e an d properly pl ace dunnage , allowed an perm i tted the use and operati on of 

### fa ulty an d defec tive e q uiprn . ent in cluding th e du nnage , b ands and ::; tac k of lumb er , a nd prov ide d inadequate ly d e s igned dunnage" ( N Y 

### , CE F Doc. 10 1 al ~ 

### 7 )_ ln hg h of th e fo regoing , th e Court find s that Plain tiffs' pro posed Fi .rst Amended 

### Comp laint is not p al pab ly ins uffic ient as a matte r of 

### la,:v an d \Vilt 

### not r esu lt in subslan tial pr ejudice t o any party . A s such, P laintiff s' mot ion for leave to fi le an d s erve lh e 

### Propo s ed · ·irst Ame1 

### de d Co m p lai nt is 

### grante d . According ly, 

### il is he.reby, ORDERFD that P laintiff s Ivfour' cio 

### Cenos an d Enma Ce r ros' mot' on f or an O r der g ranting Plajnt iff s ' mo ti on fo r leave t o file and serve a first amende d L omplain t is granted; and 

### it is furth er ORD E R ED t ha.t Pla i ntiff · notion for le ave to amend t h e com p la in t herein 

### is grant ed, and the amended comp la int in the proposed 

### fonn annexe d to the mov in g pape rs (N YSCEF Doc . . 98) s hun he deemed served upon service 

# o r a copy o f t his order w i t h not ic e o f 'ntr y t hcfeof; an d 

### it is further ORDERE D that within 10 d ay s of entry, counsel for Pla i nli f fs shall serve a co p y 

### of th is Decisi.01 1 

### and Orde r ; with no tic e of entry, on a ll pa rt ies lo 

### t h i s action; and 

### it i s fmther 

### ORD E R E D th at the defendan l s s hal1 serve a n answer to th e amende d comp l aint or o hen vi se re ·pond t hereto \Vithin 20 d ay s from the date of s aid service~ and 

### i is furthe r

1537841.2021 CER I ROS , MAURIC I O vs . NEW YOIR I K C'ITY TRA I NS IT Mot io n No . 003 Page 5, o f 6 

### [* 5]

## FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/29/2024 05:01 PM INDEX NO. 153784/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 117 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/29/2024

6 of 6 ORDERED 

### that on or b efore January 23, 2 0 2 4, the p art ies shaJl su b mit a propo sed Status Con erence Order via NYSCEF and e - mai l to SFC
- Part3 3
- Clerk(q,[nvcourts . gov. 

### If th e parti es are unab le to ag ree upon a proposed Status Conference Order, the par ti es 

### shaU ap pear for an in -pe rson s tatus conference on January 24, 2 0 24 al 9:30 a.m. in 60 Centre St ·ee t , Room 44 2 Ne w York, New York · an d 

### i is furthe r ORDERED that t he Clerk of 

### tl 1 e Court is directed to enter 

### j udgment according l y. This consti t utes the Decision an d Orde r of the Court .

1129/2024

DATE CH CKONE: A PP UC AT ION ; CH E:C K IF APPROPR IATE : C AS c D I SPOS ED GRA NITED

### □ DEN I ED SU TLEO RDE R I N,

CLUDES T RANS FE RIREASS I G N

1 53 784'2021 CERROS , MA UR ICIO vs. N E:W YORK CITY T RA N$ , IT Motiion No, 003 HO N. M RY V . ROSADO , J ,S , C. NO N .: FIN A L 0 1 -SPOS I T ION GRA N TED lN PAR T SUBM I T OR DE R AOUC I ARY APPO I N!T MEiN T

### □ O TI H E: R REF E RE NCE

Page 

## e of & 

### [* 6]