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

Search

6 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · December 23, 1981 · in the opinion

    Petes v. Hayes (1981)

    …was phrased "Does plaintiff, Alton Petes, suffer from disability or disease which specifically results from the inhalation of asbestos particles ..." (Emphasis added.) "Specifically" was not defined in the general charge. In its everyday usage, "specifically" is…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Tennessee · January 9, 1984 · in the opinion

    Johnson County, Tenn. v. US Gypsum Co. (1984)

    While it is true that contractors who perform construction work for the state operated universities are not protected by general statutes of limitation, see Dunn v. W.F. Jameson and Sons, Inc., 569 S.W.2d…

  3. 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…

  4. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · October 26, 1982 · in the opinion

    Bunker v. National Gypsum Co. (1982)

    …validity of that limitation, this Court held: "We recognize the general rule that the legislature is the primary judge as to whether the time allowed by a statute of limitations is reasonable. Although the determination of…

  5. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit · July 12, 1985 · in the opinion

    Lee v. Celotex Corp. (1985)

    …through 1976 contained asbestos. However, in paragraph 2 of the general objections to those interrogatories, National Gypsum states that it answers those interrogatories "with reference to products that may have been used to insulate pipes, boilers…

  6. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · December 29, 1988 · in the opinion

    Pecorino v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1988)

    …accrued to him not later than 1980. Furthermore, it should be noted that when the release was signed the Pecorinos did think about any exclusions or exceptions from the general, full and final release [\570] when…