Court Opinion

ID: 9952488
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-19 20:09:49.847126+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:39:41.065996
License: Public Domain

McLaughlin v Air & Liquid Sys. Corp.
               2024 NY Slip Op 30812(U)
                     March 12, 2024
           Supreme Court, New York County
        Docket Number: Index No. 190046/2022
                  Judge: Adam Silvera
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 03/13/2024 04:45 P~                                                 INDEX NO. 190046/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 309                                                                        RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/13/2024

                           SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
                                     NEW YORK COUNTY
           PRESENT:       HON. ADAM SILVERA                                    PART                              13
                                                                     Justice
                                                          ----------------X    INDEX NO.          190046/2022
            THOMAS R. MCLAUGHLIN, LILLIAN J. MCLAUGHLIN,
                                                                               MOTION DATE        12/06/2023
                                             Plaintiff,
                                                                               MOTION SEQ. NO.        003
                                     - V -

            AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION, AS
            SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BUFFALO PUMPS,
            INC.,ALFA LAVAL INC.,AMETECK, INC.,ARMSTRONG
            INTERNATIONAL, INC.,AURORA PUMP COMPANY,
            BLACKMER, BW/IP, INC. AND ITS WHOLLY-OWNED
            SUBSIDIARIES, CARRIER CORPORATION, CLEAVER-
            BROOKS, INC.,CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF
            NEW YORK, INC.,COURTER & COMPANY INC.,CRANE
            CO., CROSBY VALVE, LLC,EXXONMOBIL OIL
            CORPORATION, FERGUSON ENTERPRISES,
            LLC,INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST
            TO BLACKMAN PLUMBING SUPPLY COMPANY,
            INC.,FLOWSERVE CORPORATION, AS SUCCESSOR IN
            INTEREST TO DURAMETALLIC CORPORATION,
            FLOWSERVE US INC.,SOLELY AS SUCCESSOR TO
            ROCKWELL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, EDWARD
            VALVES, INC.,NORDSTROM VALVES, INC.,AND
            EDWARD VOGT VALVE COMPANY, FLSMIDTH
            INC.,F/K/A FULLER COMPANY, FMC CORPORATION, ON
            BEHALF OF ITS FORMER CHICAGO PUMP, PEERLESS                          DECISION + ORDER ON
            PUMP AND NORTHERN PUMP BUSINESSES, FOSTER                                   MOTION
            WHEELER ENERGY CORRPORATION, GARDNER
            DENVER, INC.,GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY,
            GEORGE A FULLER COMPANY, THE GERARD PACKING
            & BELTING CORP., GEROSA INCORPORATED,
            GOODYEAR CANADA INC.,THE GOODYEAR TIRE &
            RUBBER COMPANY, GOULDS PUMPS LLC,GREENE,
            TWEED CO., INC.,HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL
            INC.,F/K/A ALLIEDSIGNAL, INC.,AS SUCCESSOR-IN-
            INTEREST TO THE BENDIX CORPORATION, IMO
            INDUSTRIES, INC.,ITT INC.,INDIVIDUALLY AND AS
            SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO BELL & GOSSETT PUMP
            COMPANY, JENKINS BROS., KEELER/DORR-OLIVER
             BOILER COMPANY, MARIO & DIBONO PLASTERING CO.,
            INC.,THE MARLEY-WYLAIN COMPANY, NATIONAL GRID
            GENERATION LLC,O'CONNOR CONSTRUCTORS,
            INC.,PARAMOUNT GLOBAL, F/K/A VIACOMCBS
            INC.,F/K/A CBS CORPORATION, A DELAWARE
            CORPORATION, F/K/A VIACOM INC.,SUCCESSOR BY
             MERGER TO CBS CORPORATION, A PENNSYLVANIA
             CORPORATION, F/K/A WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC

            190046/2022 MCLAUGHLIN, THOMAS R. ET AL vs. AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION,          Page 1 of 8
            AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BUFFALO PUMPS, INC. ET AL
            Motion No. 003

                                                               1 of 8
[* 1]
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/13/2024 04:45 P~                                                INDEX NO. 190046/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 309                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/13/2024

            CORPORATION, PNEUMO ABEX LLC,SUCCESSOR IN
            INTEREST TO ABEX CORPORATION, RILEY POWER
            INC.,SID HARVEY INDUSTRIES, INC.,SPIRAX SARCO,
            INC.,TISHMAN LIQUIDATING CORPORATION,
            TREADWELL CORPORATION, UNION CARBIDE
            CORPORATION, VELAN VALVE CORPORATION,
            WARREN PUMPS LLC,WEIR VALVE & CONTROLS, USA,
            INC.,YORK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, ZURN
            INDUSTRIES, LLC,EATON CORPORATION, AS
            SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST TO CUTLER-HAMMER,
            INC.,CLYDE UNION INC.,GRINNELL LLC,ITT
            LLC,INDIVIDUALL Y AND AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST
            TO HOFFMAN SPECIALTY MANUFACTURING CO., MET-
            PRO TECHNOLOGIES LLC., A CECO ENVIRONMENTAL
            COMPANY, SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO MET-PRO
            CORPORATION, ON BEHALF OF ITS DEAN PUMP
            DIVISION, ROCKWELL AUTOMATION, INC.,AS
            SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO ALLEN-BRADLEY
            COMPANY, LLC,SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC USA,
            INC.,FORMERLY KNOWN AS SQUARED COMPANY,
            VIKING PUMP, INC.,BMCE, INC.,F/K/A UNITED
            CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS, KAMCO SUPPLY CORP.,
            MORSE TEC LLC,F/K/A BORGWARNER MORSE TEC
            LLC,AS SUCCESSOR-BY-MERGER TO BORG-WARNER
            CORPORATION, THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER
            COMPANY, THE PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK AND
            NEW JERSEY, THE WILLIAM POWELL COMPANY, TACO,
            INC.,LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY D/B/A LIPA

                                             Defendant.

           --------------------- -------------------------------X

           The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 003) 240, 241, 242, 243,
           244,245,246,247,248,249,250,251,252,253,278,282,285,286,287,288,289,290,292
           were read on this motion to/for                             JUDGMENT-SUMMARY

                  In this action, defendant Long Island Lighting Company d/b/a/ LIPA (LILCO), a wholly

           owned subsidiary of the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA), moves pursuant to CPLR 3212

           seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross-claims against LILCO on the

           grounds that the claims were previously released pursuant to a Settlement Agreement and

           General Release executed by the plaintiffs in a prior action.

                  Plaintiff Thomas McLaughlin (McLaughlin) was exposed to asbestos during the course

           of his work as a steamfitter and welder during the construction of LILCO's Shoreham Nuclear

           Power Station from 1978 through 1982. His work included the welding of hangars and pipes, as

            190046/2022 MCLAUGHLIN, THOMAS R. ET AL vs. AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION,        Page 2 of 8
            AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BUFFALO PUMPS, INC. ET AL
            Motion No. 003

                                                          2 of 8
[* 2]
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/13/2024 04:45 P~                                                 INDEX NO. 190046/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 309                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/13/2024

           well as working on piping systems. He claims that the use of Novatex blankets and rolls used to

           wrap the pipes he welded exposed him to asbestos. In January 2022, McLaughlin was diagnosed

           with mesothelioma. This action was commenced on March 3, 2022, but did not name LILCO as

           a defendant until the fourth amended complaint filed on June 15, 2022. LILCO filed a timely

           answer on July 7, 2022, asserting the affirmative defense that the plaintiffs' claims are barred

           pursuant to a previous release. McLaughlin passed away on October 20, 2023.

                  In 1988, the plaintiffs commenced a federal action in the Joint Eastern and Southern

           Districts Asbestos Litigation, and LILCO was one of the defendants. In that action, McLaughlin

           sought to recover damages for his personal injuries from asbestos exposure, specifically,

           asbestosis. The action was resolved via a Settlement Agreement dated January 22, 1993, and a

           General Release dated April 15, 1993. The "Settlement Agreement constitutes a full and final

           settlement of the rights between plaintiffs and LILCO." Notice of Motion, Exh. G, Settlement

           Agreement dated January 22, 1993, p. 2. It further states that,

                  plaintiffs on the one hand and LILCO on the other hand desire to discontinue the
                  Actions with prejudice and to settle fully and finally all differences between them,
                  including, but not limited to, those claims asserted in the Actions and any and all
                  other claims or causes of action arising from the allegations therein, or which may
                  arise or could have arisen out of, or in connection with, such allegations. Id. at p.1-
                  2.

           Section 3 of the Settlement Agreement, titled Settlement with Non-Verdict Plaintiffs, also
           provides that,

                   LILCO agrees to pay to Weitz & Luxenberg Eleven Thousand Seven Hundred
                   Fifty Dollars ($11,750.00) per non-verdict plaintiff subject to: a) the receipt by
                   LILCO of medical records confirming that the non-verdict plaintiff has been
                   diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease (i.e. mesothelioma, lung cancer, GI
                   cancer, pulmonary asbestosis, pleural thickening, etc.). Id. at p. 3

           In addition, the General Release stipulates that,

                   THOMAS MCLAUGHLIN and LILLIAN MCLAUGHLIN ("Releasors"),
                   plaintiffs in an action captioned THOMAS MCLAUGHLIN AND LILLIAN

            190046/2022 MCLAUGHLIN, THOMAS R. ET AL vs. AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION,          Page 3 of 8
            AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BUFFALO PUMPS, INC. ET AL
            Motion No. 003

                                                           3 of 8
[* 3]
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/13/2024 04:45 P~                                                INDEX NO. 190046/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 309                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/13/2024

                  MCLAUGHLIN -v- LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY pending in the
                  court, and bearing the Index Number 88-CIV-6739 (the "Action"), for and in
                  consideration of the sum of and other good and valuable consideration (the
                  "Settlement Amount"), paid by LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY, and
                  its past and present parents, affiliates and subsidiaries and its predecessors and
                  successors in interest and its agents, heirs and assigns ("Releasee"), the receipt and
                  sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has and hereby does expressly
                  covenant and agree forever to refrain from bringing any suit or proceeding at law
                  or in equity against Releasee and hereby also releases Releasee from any and all
                  claims of any kind whatsoever that they ever had or may ever have against Releasee
                  as a result of the alleged exposure to asbestos fiber or products containing asbestos
                  or dust therefrom, including, but not limited to, any and all claims which may arise
                  for personal injuries or wrongful death ("the Claims") and is in complete
                  satisfaction of the Claims, arising from this personal injury asbestos lawsuit. Notice
                  of Motion, Exh. H, General Release, dated April 15, 1993, p. 1.

           The federal action and the instant action are both based on McLaughlin's asbestos exposure

           from LILCO's Shoreham facility from 1978 to 1982. LILCO made the settlement payment

           from the federal action by check dated October 27, 1993. LILCO now moves pursuant to

           CPLR 3212 to dismiss the complaint on the basis that any claims by the plaintiffs regarding

           McLaughlin's asbestos exposure are barred as per the Settlement Agreement and General

           Release.

                  Summary judgment is a drastic remedy and should only be granted if the moving party

           has sufficiently established that it is warranted as a matter of law.   ,Hvare:: v Prospect Hosp.,

           68 NY2d 320, 324 (1986). "The proponent of a summary judgment motion must make a prima

          facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to

           eliminate any material issues of fact from the case." IVinegrad i: New York Unil'ersity :ifedica!

           Center, 64 NY2d 851, 853 (1985). Despite the sufficiency of the opposing papers, the failure to

           make such a showing requires denial of the motion. Sei: iJ. at 853. Summary judgment motions

           should be denied if the opposing party presents admissible evidence establishing that there is a

           genuine issue of fact remaining.       Zuckerman v (      of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 560 (1980).

            190046/2022 MCLAUGHLIN, THOMAS R. ET AL vs. AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION,         Page 4 of 8
            AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BUFFALO PUMPS, INC. ET AL
            Motion No. 003

                                                           4 of 8
[* 4]
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/13/2024 04:45 P~                                                  INDEX NO. 190046/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 309                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/13/2024

           LILCO argues that the Settlement Agreement and General Release bar the instant action.

                     Generally, "a valid release that is clear and unambiguous on its face constitutes a

           complete bar to an action on a claim which is the subject of the release absent fraudulent

           inducement, fraudulent concealment, misrepresentation, mutual mistake or duress". Gloh.

           Precast. Inc v Stonewall Contr. Corp., 78 AD3d 432,432 (1st Dept 2010). "The theory of

           mutual mistake, when acted upon by the courts in refusing to give full effect to a general release,

           is based upon a determination or conclusion that the minds of the parties failed to meet in

           agreement upon the essential elements of the instrument." Viskovich v Walsh-Ful!cr-Slulte1T, 16

           AD2d 67, 68 (1st Dept 1962), gff_d. 13 NY2d 1100 (1963). "In..the instance of mutual mistake,

           the burden of persuasion is on the one who would set the release aside." Afungini v JlcClwx, 24

           NY2d 556, 563 (1969). Thus, it is the plaintiffs burden "to establish that he did not intend more

           than a limited release; that he did not know and could not know of the later revealed injuries, and

           that different injuries are involved rather than unanticipated consequences of known injuries." Id

           at 568.

                     Further, "a release may encompass unknown claims .. .if the parties so intend and the

           agreement is fairly and knowingly made". Centro Empresurial Cempresu S.A. v               Movil.

           SA.B.       CV, 17 NY3d 269, 276 (2011) (internal quotations omitted). "[I]f from the particular

           language of the release or from the circumstances of the negotiated settlement, there was a

           conscious and deliberate intention to discharge liability from all consequences of an accident, the

           release will be sustained and bar any future claims of previously unknown injuries... JHangini, 24

           NY2d at 564. "However, when the evidence in the record including, inter alia, the circumstances

           surrounding the release, as well as the parties' course of dealings, evinces that the parties'

           intentions were not reflected in the general terms of the release, the release does not conclusively

            190046/2022 MCLAUGHLIN, THOMAS R. ET AL vs. AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION,           Page 5 of 8
            AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BUFFALO PUMPS, INC. ET AL
            Motion No. 003

[* 5]                                                       5 of 8
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/13/2024 04:45 P~                                                 INDEX NO. 190046/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 309                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/13/2024

           establish a defense as a matter oflaw". Intl. Asbestos Removal v Beys Specialty. Inc., 135 AD3d

           486,486 (1st Dept 2016).

                  Here, the language of the Settlement Agreement is clear and unambiguous in that it bars

           "any and all other claims or causes of action arising from the allegations therein, or which may

           arise or could have arisen out of, or in connection with, such allegations". Settlement Agreement,

           supra, p. 2. The General Release also provides that the plaintiffs "expressly covenant and agree

           forever to refrain from bringing any suit or proceeding ... and also releases Releasee from any and

           all claims of any kind whatsoever that they ever had or may ever have against Releasee as a

           result of the alleged exposure to asbestos fiber or products containing asbestos or dust therefrom,

           including, but not limited to, any and all claims which may arise for personal injuries or

           wrongful death ... ". General Release, supra, p. 1. By these submissions, LILCO has met its

           burden of proof on summary judgment. Thus, the burden shifts to the plaintiffs to demonstrate

           that the release should be set aside.

                   In opposition, the plaintiffs argue that the Settlement Agreement and General Release

           from the prior action resulted in McLaughlin recovering for asbestosis, not mesothelioma, and

           that a question of fact remains as to whether the decedent's mesothelioma constitutes a separate

           and distinct injury beyond the contemplation of the release. However, plaintiffs fail to offer any

           evidentiary support for this assertion. Instead, plaintiffs rely heavily on Mangini, specifically

           arguing that unknown injuries are treated "as matters not in contemplation at the time of

           settlement, despite the generality of standardized language in releases". Mangini, 24 NY2d at

           564. However, as demonstrated in LILCO's reply papers, the Settlement Agreement did, in fact,

           contemplate mesothelioma. The Settlement Agreement specifically lists mesothelioma as an

           example of an "asbestos-related disease" for which plaintiffs could recover once LILCO received

            190046/2022 MCLAUGHLIN, THOMAS R. ET AL vs. AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION,          Page 6 of 8
            AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BUFFALO PUMPS, INC. ET AL
            Motion No. 003

                                                           6 of 8
[* 6]
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/13/2024 04:45 P~                                                  INDEX NO. 190046/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 309                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/13/2024

          medical records confirming the diagnosis of the disease. Therefore, mesothelioma was not

          uncontemplated as an asbestos-related disease.

                  The plaintiffs' reliance on Mangini is further misplaced because the agreement in that

           case is far broader than the Settlement Agreement and General Release in the instant action. As

           discussed above, it is evident from the language in the General Release, specifically the release

           from "any and all claims of any kind whatsoever that they ever had or may ever have ... as a

           result of the alleged exposure to asbestos fiber or products containing asbestos or dust therefrom,

           including, but not limited to, any and all claims which may arise for personal injuries or

           wrongful death ... " that the parties intended to encompass other illnesses that may arise later as a

           result of asbestos exposure. General Release, supra p. 1. The Settlement Agreement also

           provided that the settlement was in "complete satisfaction" of all existing and future asbestos-

           related claims. See Langhorne v Amchcm Products, Inc., 23 AD3d 208,209 (1st Dept 2005).

                  Further, the plaintiffs have failed to show that the Settlement Agreement and General

           Release were intended to be limited, nor have they proven that the Settlement Agreement and

           General Release were unfairly or unknowingly made. The Court of Appeals has held that

           "[s]trong policy considerations favor the enforcement of settlement agreements". Denhurg r

           Parker Chapin Fial/au & Klimpi, 82 NY2d 375,383 (1993). In light of the foregoing, LILCO's

           motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 seeking dismissal of the complaint and all

           cross-claims is granted.

                   Accordingly, it is hereby

                   ORDERED that defendant LILCO's motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR

           3212 dismissing the complaint and all cross-claims is hereby granted; and it is further

            190046/2022 MCLAUGHLIN, THOMAS R. ET AL vs. AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION,          Page 7 of 8
            AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BUFFALO PUMPS, INC. ET AL
            Motion No. 003

                                                           7 of 8
[* 7]
 [FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/13/2024 04:45 P~                                                   INDEX NO. 190046/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 309                                                                          RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/13/2024

                   ORDERED that the complaint is dismissed in its entirety as against defendant LILCO

          with costs and disbursements to said defendant as taxed by the Clerk of the Court, and the Clerk

           is directed to enter judgment accordingly in favor of said defendant; and it is further

                   ORDERED that the action is severed and continued against the remaining defendants;

           and it is further

                   ORDERED that the caption be amended to reflect the dismissal and that all future papers

           filed with the court bear the amended caption; and it is further

                   ORDERED that within 30 days of entry, defendant LILCO shall serve a copy of this

           decision/order upon all parties with notice of entry.

                   This constitutes the Decision/Order of the Court.

                   3/12/2024
                     DATE                                                         ADAM SILVERA, J.S.C.

            CHECK ONE:              X   CASE DISPOSED                  NON-FINAL DISPOSITION

                                    X   GRANTED         □ DENIED       GRANTED IN PART            □ OTHER
            APPLICATION:                SETTLE ORDER                   SUBMIT ORDER

            CHECK IF APPROPRIATE:       INCLUDES
                                        TRANSFER/REASSIGN
                                                                       FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT      □ REFERENCE

            190046/2022 MCLAUGHLIN, THOMAS R. ET AL vs. AIR & LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION,            Page 8 of 8
            AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO BUFFALO PUMPS, INC. ET AL
            Motion No. 003

                                                            8 of 8
[* 8]