Pace v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp., 171 F. Supp. 3d 254

Background

Decedent Raymond Balcerzak, a long‑time electrician (1957–2000), was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2011 and died in 2014; Plaintiff (substituted) sued multiple manufacturers alleging asbestos exposure caused his disease.
At summary judgment, six defendants moved: Rockwell Automation/Allen‑Bradley, BW/IP (Byron Jackson), Air & Liquid Systems (successor to Buffalo Pumps), Gardner Denver, Schneider Electric (Square D), and Warren Pumps.
Plaintiff’s primary evidentiary theory relied on Balcerzak’s deposition testimony about working with or near switchgear, contactors, arc chutes, and observing pumps aboard Navy ships; many product identifications were vague or untethered to specific times/sites.
Several ship records and other documents were produced after fact discovery closed; the court declined to consider late‑produced exhibits when they unfairly prejudiced defendants.
The court granted summary judgment for Warren, Square D, Buffalo, Gardner Denver, and Byron Jackson; denied summary judgment for Allen‑Bradley (Rockwell) based on triable issues about arc chutes and Bakelite backing on contactors.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether plaintiff identified Warren pumps as source of exposure aboard USS Constellation	Warren pumps appeared in late ship records and thus Warren products were used where Balcerzak worked	No admissible evidence (and no deposition testimony) ties Warren products to Balcerzak; late records were undisclosed and inadmissible	Grant — no admissible product ID; summary judgment for Warren
Whether Square D products (switchgear/arc chutes) were sufficiently identified and connected to time/place	Balcerzak described switchgear, arc chutes, and blowing out chutes causing dust; identified by nameplate/logo	Identification too general and plaintiff cannot tie Square D products to any specific employer, site, or time over decades	Grant — identification factually plausible but failure to connect to specific time/place defeats claim
Whether Allen‑Bradley products caused exposure (switchgear, arc chutes, Bakelite backing)	Balcerzak testified he worked on Allen‑Bradley switchgear, removed arc chutes that "snap in/out," and replaced Bakelite backing from stockroom	Allen‑Bradley says it did not manufacture the high‑voltage switchgear described; arc chutes attached with screws; contactors used metal backing (no Bakelite)	Deny — genuine issues of material fact exist as to arc chutes and Bakelite backing (triable issues)
Whether Buffalo, Byron Jackson, Gardner Denver were identified as sources of exposure	Plaintiff later produced ship records but no timely evidence tying their products to Balcerzak	No admissible product identification or deposition testimony linking products to decedent; late records excluded	Grant — summary judgment for Buffalo, Byron Jackson, Gardner Denver

Key Cases Cited

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (movant may prevail by showing nonmoving party lacks evidence on an essential element)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard: no genuine issue for trial if record taken as a whole could not lead a jury to find for the nonmovant)
Johnson v. Celotex Corp., 899 F.2d 1281 (2d Cir. 1990) (under NY law plaintiff must show exposure to defendant’s product and that exposure was a substantial factor)
O’Brien v. National Gypsum Co., 944 F.2d 69 (2d Cir. 1991) (circumstantial evidence may suffice in asbestos cases where direct proof of specific product is difficult)
In re Brooklyn Navy Yard Asbestos Litigation, 971 F.2d 831 (2d Cir. 1992) (permitting causation proof without exact product identification when circumstantial evidence shows product presence)
Jerome B. Grubart, Inc. v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co., 513 U.S. 527 (1995) (two‑part test for whether tort is maritime: location and connection tests)
Keene Corp. v. United States, 700 F.2d 836 (2d Cir. 1983) (torts arising out of work on an uncompleted vessel are generally non‑maritime)