No fee unless we recover compensation for your family Text size 833-4-ASBESTOS (833-427-2378) Free Case Review

Search

34 results for “General Electric”, page 1 of 2

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · September 30, 2015

    Hedden v. CBS Corporation (2015)

    The court granted summary judgment to Crown Cork & Seal, CBS, General Electric, Gardner Denver, Link-Belt and Riley Power, and denied it to Crane Co. and John Crane, Inc. on the maritime claims, so the Heddens…

  2. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · March 2, 2016

    Myers v. Crouse-Hinds Division OF Cooper Industries, Inc. (2016)

    The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed the denial of summary judgment to General Electric and Owens-Illinois in the Geyman case and reversed summary judgment for Crouse-Hinds and the other defendants in the Myers case, so…

  3. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · August 31, 2007

    Asbestos Corporation Limited v. Akaiwa (2007)

    …summary judgment is limited to the materials designated to the trial court, so evidence first offered on appeal is not considered. Product Identification; Trial Procedure and Discovery Worksites: Everett Electric electrical contractor Everett Electric 1980-1982

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · July 8, 1988 · in the opinion

    Knox v. AC & S, Inc. (1988)

    …any site or area where a hazardous substance has been deposited, stored, disposed of, or otherwise come to be located." State v. General Electric Co., 592 F.Supp. 291, 295 (N.D. NY 1984) (citation omitted)…

  5. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · September 28, 2016 · in the opinion

    Myers v. Bremen Casting, Inc. (2016)

    …asbestos work on the Defendants' premises created a peculiar risk of harm as applied to Larry, an electrician. The due precaution exception to the general rule of non-liability is available to the Myerses. In sum…

  6. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · June 28, 2005 · in the opinion

    Psi Energy, Inc. v. Roberts (2005)

    In contrast, the previously defined exceptions to the general rule of nonliability for negligence of an independent contractor had found the principal liable not for its own negligence, but for negligence of its contractor in carrying…

  7. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · March 25, 2003 · in the opinion

    AlliedSignal, Inc. v. Herring (2003)

    …Tennant Co., United States Gypsum Co., United States Mineral Products Co., Wagner Electric Co., Appellants (Defendants below), v. Lucille HERRING, on her own behalf and on behalf of the Estate of Loyd Herring, Deceased., Appellee (Plaintiff…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · June 6, 1995 · in the opinion

    Harris v. AC & S, Inc. (1995)

    …822 (1971); Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Mfg. Co., 313 U.S. 487, 61 S.Ct. 1020, 85 L.Ed. 1477 (1941); Clarin Corp. v. Massachusetts General Life Ins. Co., 44 F.3d 471, 474 (7th…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana · November 2, 2021 · in the opinion

    Hostetler v. Johnson Controls, Inc. (2021)

    …415-1 ¶65; DE 436 ¶ 65.) Chlorinated volatile organic compounds can also be present in the "background," as a result of general industrial pollution or through cleaning products, air fresheners, arts-and-crafts products, gun cleaners…

  10. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · December 11, 1990 · in the opinion

    Knox v. AC & S, Inc. (1990)

    …Code sections 22-3-7-2 through XX-X-X-XX as the IWODA despite the fact that the Indiana General Assembly repealed the Act's short title in 1988. \[5\] The employer's exemption from…

  11. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · July 20, 2001 · in the opinion

    Black v. ACandS, Inc. (2001)

    …concluded that the plaintiff in McIntosh was not entitled to a remedy under Section 12 because "the General Assembly has determined that injuries occurring ten years after the product was delivered to a user are not…

  12. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · March 17, 1999

    Novicki v. Rapid-American Corp. (1999)

    …and Rapid-American conceded it did not. The case therefore fell under section 5, the general product liability limitation and repose provision. Because the parties had not briefed section 5, the court remanded for further argument…

  13. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · March 25, 2003

    Jurich v. Garlock, Inc. (2003)

    …applied. One statute covers asbestos claims against those who mined and sold asbestos. The other is the general ten-year statute of repose for product claims. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants. The…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana · September 16, 2020

    Hostetler v. Johnson Controls, Inc. (2020)

    …plaintiffs offered no evidence of how much any of them was exposed to, and the expert assumed only that exposure was above background. The court left open whether the experts' general testimony could still be offered.

  15. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · January 28, 2004

    Psi Energy, Inc. v. Roberts (2004)

    …and the landowner should have anticipated the harm, including where it saw workers going unprotected. A general verdict stands if the evidence supports any one theory of liability. Premises Owner Liability; Fault, Apportionment and Settlement Credits…

  16. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · October 18, 2001

    Jurich v. Garlock, Inc. (2001)

    …not sellers of asbestos-containing products. The general ten-year repose period violates the open courts clause of Article I, Section 12 as applied to a latent asbestos disease where exposure began before the Act or…

  17. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · September 29, 1981 · in the opinion

    Bunker v. National Gypsum Co. (1981)

    …0 \ \ 0-9 \ 346 \ 89.6 \ 10.4 \ 36 \ 0 \ 0 \ \ ----------\ -------\ --------\ ----------\ ------\ ------\ ------\ \ Total \ 1,117 \ 51.5 \ 48.5 \ 366 \ 126 \ 50 \ The general purpose of a statute of limitations is to encourage prompt resolution of claims…

  18. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · April 6, 2004 · in the opinion

    Roberts v. ACandS, Inc. (2004)

    …out of and in the course of the employment. Ordinary diseases of life to which the general public is exposed outside of the employment shall not be compensable, except where such diseases follow as an incident…

  19. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · November 6, 2001 · in the opinion

    Allied Signal, Inc. v. Herring (2001)

    …[\1036] Moreover, section 2 was enacted to extend the general limitations period in express recognition of the long latency period associated with asbestos-related diseases and illnesses. Extending the limitations period only for the very few…

  20. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · September 14, 2001 · in the opinion

    Parks v. AP Green Industries, Inc. (2001)

    …disease and its cause constitutes a new injury and the basis for a separate cause of action. In general, product liability actions must be brought within two years after the cause of action accrues or within…