W.S.R v. FCA U.S., LLC

• Decision Date: 30 September 2022
• Docket Number: 18-CV-6961 (KMK)
• Parties: W.S.R., an infant by and through his father WILLIAM RICHARDSON, WILLIAM RICHARDSON, and NICOLE RICHARDSON, Plaintiffs, v. FCA US, LLC, YANFENG U.S. AUTOMOTIVE INTERIOR SYSTEM II LLC A/K/A/ YANFENG AUTOMOTIVE INTERIOR SYSTEMS, ADIENT PLC, JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC., and JCIM, LLC, Defendants. FCA US, LLC, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. YANFENG U.S. AUTOMOTIVE INTERIOR SYSTEM II LLC A/K/A/ YANFENG AUTOMOTIVE INTERIOR SYSTEMS, ADIENT PLC, JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC., and JCIM, LLC, Third-Party Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

W.S.R., an infant by and through his father WILLIAM RICHARDSON, WILLIAM RICHARDSON, and NICOLE RICHARDSON, Plaintiffs, v. FCA US, LLC, YANFENG U.S. AUTOMOTIVE INTERIOR SYSTEM II LLC A/K/A/ YANFENG AUTOMOTIVE INTERIOR SYSTEMS, ADIENT PLC, JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC., and JCIM, LLC, Defendants.

FCA US, LLC, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. YANFENG U.S. AUTOMOTIVE INTERIOR SYSTEM II LLC A/K/A/ YANFENG AUTOMOTIVE INTERIOR SYSTEMS, ADIENT PLC, JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC., and JCIM, LLC, Third-Party Defendants.

No. 18-CV-6961 (KMK)

United States District Court, S.D. New York

September 30, 2022

Yitzchak M. Fogel, Esq. Danielle George, Esq. Phillips & Paolicelli, LLP

Jessica Leigh Gross, Esq.

Kennedys LLP

Maureen Doerner Fogel, Esq.

Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C.

Carl L. Steccato, Esq.

Katherine Garcia, Esq.

John P. Mitchell, Esq.

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

OPINION & ORDER

KENNETH M. KARAS, DISTRICT JUDGE:

W.S.R. (“W.S.R.”), an infant by and through his father William Richardson, William Richardson (“William”), and Nicole Richardson (“Nicole”; collectively, “Plaintiffs”) bring this Action against FCA U.S. LLC (“FCA”), Yanfeng U.S. Automotive Interior Systems II (a.k.a. Yanfeng Automotive Interior Systems) (“YFAI”), Adient PLC (“Adient”), Johnson Controls, Inc. (“Johnson Controls”), and JCIM, LLC (“JCIM”; with Adient and Johnson Controls, “AJJ”; altogether, “Defendants”), sounding in products liability and personal injury following an automobile accident. (See generally Third Am. Compl. (“TAC”) (Dkt. No. 161).) Defendants have filed a series of counterclaims sounding in indemnification and contribution. (See Dkt. Nos. 172, 174, 176.)

Before the Court are several motions for summary judgment: 1) AJJ's Motion for Summary Judgment against Plaintiffs; 2) Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment against all Defendants, as well as a separate claim against FCA; 3) FCA's Motion for Summary Judgment against YFAI, 4) YFAI's Motion for Summary Judgment against FCA and Plaintiffs; 5) AJJ's Motion for Summary Judgment against FCA; and 6) AJJ's Motion for Summary Judgment against YFAI. (See AJJ's Not. of Mot. for Summ. J. (“AJJ's Pls. Not. of Mot.”) (Dkt. No. 227); Pls.' Not. of Mot. for Summ. J. (“Pls.' Not. of Mot.”) (Dkt. No. 226); FCA's Not. of Mot. for Summ. J. (“FCA's Not. of Mot.”) (Dkt. No. 239); YFAI's Not. of Mot. for Summ. J. (“YFAI's Not. of Mot.”) (Dkt. No. 250); AJJ's Not. of Mot. for Summ. J. (“AJJ's YFAI Not. of Mot.”) (Dkt. No. 233); AJJ's Not. of Mot. for Summ. J. (“AJJ's FCA Not. of Mot.”) (Dkt. No. 236).) For the following reasons, AJJ's Motion against Plaintiffs is granted, Plaintiffs' Motion is granted in part and denied in part, FCA's Motion is denied, and YFAI's Motion is denied.^[1]

I. Background A. Factual Background

The following facts are taken from the Parties' statements pursuant to Local Civil Rule 56.1, specifically:

• AJJ's 56.1 Statement in Support of its Motion regarding Plaintiffs' Claims (AJJ.'s Local Civil Rule 56.1 Statement in Supp. of AJJ Mot. on Pls.' Claims (“AJJ's Pls. 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 227-2));

• Plaintiffs' 56.1 Statement in Support of their Motion regarding Defendants' Claims (Pls.' Local Civil Rule 56.1 Statement in Supp. of Pls.' Mot. (“Pls.' 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 232);

• AJJ's 56.1 Statement in Support of its Motion regarding YFAI's Crossclaims (AJJ.'s Local Civil Rule 56.1 Statement in Supp. of AJJ Mot. on YFAI.'s Crossclaims (“AJJ's YFAI 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 233-2)); • AJJ's 56.1 Statement in Support of its Motion regarding FCA's Crossclaims (AJJ.'s Local Civil Rule 56.1 Statement in Supp. of AJJ Mot. on FCA's Crossclaims (“AJJ's FCA 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 236-2));

• YFAI's 56.1 Statement in Support of its Motion regarding Plaintiffs' Claims (YFAI's Local Civil Rule 56.1 Statement in Supp. of YFAI Mot. on Pls.' Claims (“YFAI's 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 237-2));

• FCA's 56.1 Statement in Support of its Motion regarding Plaintiffs' Claims (FCA's Local Civil Rule 56.1 Statement in Supp. of FCA Mot. on Pls.' Claims (“FCA's 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 242));

• FCA's Response to Plaintiffs' 56.1 Statement (FCA's Response to Pls.' Rule 56.1 Statement (“FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 266));

• FCA's Response to YFAI's 56.1 Statement (FCA's Response to YFAI's Rule 56.1 Statement (“FCA's Resp. to YFAI's 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 276));

• FCA's Response to AJJ's 56.1 Statement (FCA's Response to AJJ's Rule 56.1 Statement (“FCA's Resp. to AJJ's 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 292));\

• Plaintiffs' Response to YFAI's 56.1 Statement (Pls.' Response to YFAI's Rule 56.1 Statement (“Pls.' Resp. to YFAI's 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 304));

• Plaintiffs' Response to AJJ's 56.1 Statement (Pls.' Response to AJJ's Rule 56.1 Statement (“Pls.' Resp. to AJJ's 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 306));

• AJJ's Response to Plaintiffs' 56.1 Statement (AJJ's Response to Pls.' Rule 56.1 Statement (“AJJ's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 312));

• AJJ's Response to FCA's 56.1 Statement (AJJ's Response to FCA's Rule 56.1 Statement (“AJJ's Resp. to FCA's 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 314));

• YFAI's Response to Plaintiffs' 56.1 Statement (YFAI's Response to Pls.' Rule 56.1 Statement (“YFAI's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 316));

• YFAI's Response to AJJ's 56.1 Statement (YFAI's Response to AJJ's Rule 56.1 Statement (“YFAI's Resp. to AJJ's 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 319)); and,

• YFAI's Response to FCA's 56.1 Statement (YFAI's Response to FCA's Rule 56.1 Statement (“YFAI's Resp. to FCA's 56.1”) (Dkt. No. 322)).^[2]

Additionally, where appropriate, the Court cites directly to the admissible evidence submitted by the Parties. The facts as described below are in dispute to the extent indicated.

1. The Parties

“FCA is a global manufacturer of automobiles,” (Pls.' 56.1 ¶ 45; FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶ 45) and “its principal place of business [is] in Auburn Hill, Michigan.” (FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶ 45.)

In 2014, Johnson Controls and Yanfeng Automotive Trim Systems Co., Ltd. “agreed to create a joint venture contributing their respective interior automotive product businesses.” (AJJ'S YFAI 56.1 ¶ 8; YFAI's Resp. to AJJ's 56.1 ¶ 8.) On April 10, 2015, [Yanfeng Automotive Trim Systems Co., Ltd.] and [Johnson Controls] signed an Amended Master Agreement (“MA”) forming [] YFAI as the joint venture company, which closed on July 2, 2015[.]” (AJJ'S YFAI 56.1 ¶ 9; YFAI's Resp. to AJJ's 56.1 ¶ 9.)

On July 2, 2015, Johnson Controls “entered into a joint venture with . . . Yanfeng Automotive Trim Systems Co., Ltd., to form YFAI.” (FCA's 56.1 ¶ 9; YFAI's Resp. to FCA's 56.1 ¶ 9.) Pursuant to Section 9 of the agreement creating the joint venture, “YFAI agreed to indemnify and hold harmless [Johnson Controls] for ‘any and all [c]osts incurred by [Johnson Controls] arising out of, relating to or resulting from [YFAI's] [a]ssumed [l]iabilities,' including third party claims.” (AJJ'S YFAI 56.1 ¶ 10; YFAI's Resp. to AJJ's 56.1 ¶ 10.) Pursuant to the MA, “[e]ffective July 2, 2015, [Johnson Controls] gave YFAI all its open contracts with FCA including working on the [2017 Chrysler Pacifica instrument panel], including [Purchase Order] 4820005.” (FCA's 56.1 ¶ 10; YFAI's Resp. to FCA's 56.1 ¶ 10.)^[3]

2. The Events Giving Rise to this Cause of Action

On June 24, 2018, W.S.R. was nine years old and at home with his parents, William and Nicole Richardson. (See Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 18-19; FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 18-19; AJJ's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 18-19.) William and Nicole Richardson owned a 2017 Chrysler Pacifica minivan (“RU”),^[4] VIN number 2C4RC1EG8HR513511, which was parked in their driveway on the top of a hill. (See Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 20-21; FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 20-21; AJJ's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 20-21.)

After accidentally opening the car's hood, W.S.R. then opened the manual parking release (“MPR”) plug, or “cover”; however, the Parties dispute how W.S.R. did-or could have-done so. (See Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 27-30; FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 27-30; AJJ's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 27-30.) Irrespective of how this was achieved, by opening the MPR cover, W.S.R. saw and pulled what he referred to as an “orange string,” which prompted the car to begin rolling backwards. (See Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 31-32; FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 31-32; AJJ's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 31-32.) Subsequently, W.S.R. got out and went to the back of the car, trying to push it in order to stop it from rolling; however, the car “rolled over W.S.R. and down the driveway until it crashed into an electrical box.” (Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 33-34; FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 33-34; AJJ's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 33-34.) As a result, W.S.R. sustained injuries, though the Parties dispute the extent of the injuries. (See Pls.' 56.1 ¶ 39; FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶ 39; AJJ's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶ 39.)

A first responder that entered the car after the incident found the car in “Neutral,” as did the police. (See Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 36, 40; FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 36, 40; AJJ's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 36, 40.)

Notably, a similar incident occurred in which another young boy seemingly inadvertently hit the MPR cover, causing a similar rolling of a different 2017 Chrysler Pacifica. (See Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 73-100; FCA's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 73-100; AJJ's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 73-100; YFAI's Resp. to Pls.' 56.1 ¶¶ 73-100.)^[5]

3. Vehicle Production and Relevant Contracts

FCA is the manufacturer of the 2017 Chrysler Pacifica. (FCA's 56.1 ¶ 6; YFAI's Resp. to FCA's 56.1 ¶ 6.) More specifically, “FCA built the [] RU VIN 2C4RC1EG8HR513511 in May[] 2016.” (FCA's 56.1 ¶ 7; AJJ's Resp. to FCA's 56.1 ¶ 7; YFAI's Resp. to FCA's 56.1 ¶ 7.)^[6] Importantly, “FCA built the [the car by] incorporating a steering column cover and MPR cover supplied to it by defendant YFAI.” (FCA's 56.1 ¶ 110; AJJ's Resp. to FCA's 56.1 ¶ 110; YFAI's Resp. to FCA's 56.1 ¶ 110.)

a The FCA/Johnson Controls Letter...