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

Search

427 results for “General Electric”, page 17 of 22

  1. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · June 1, 1988 · in the opinion

    H & H Plumbing Co. v. Indus. Comm'n (1988)

    …on claimant's testimony regarding his work on the boilers and the appearance of the gaskets. The Commission also relied on the testimony of Norris, H & H's general foreman, that the gaskets contained asbestos. Moreover…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Kansas · August 19, 1986 · in the opinion

    Menne v. Celotex Corp. (1986)

    …the cause in fact of his injuries does not undermine the principle that a defendant should only be held responsible for the damage it caused. As long as a plaintiff can prove general causation, i.e.…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York · December 7, 1989 · in the opinion

    Rummo v. The Celotex Corp. (In re Joint Eastern & Southern Dist. Asbestos Lit., 1989)

    …Ed. 1188 (1938). But this state's highest courts have not definitively analyzed the issue in published opinions. We turn therefore to the general law of torts, as would New York's highest court. MacPherson v…

  4. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · January 21, 1985 · in the opinion

    Jackson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1985)

    …As a consequence, federal courts would become increasingly responsible for establishing a general federal tort law in a manner we think is inconsistent with the teachings of Erie and the logic behind our federal system. Cf…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · November 19, 1984 · in the opinion

    Colombo v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1984)

    13, 68 L.Ed.2d 1 (1981) (federal law shall govern issues arising in negligence actions under LHWCA section 5(b)) with Edmonds v. Compagnie Generale Atlantique, 443 U.S. 256, 272 n. 31, 99 S…

  6. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit · June 30, 1982 · in the opinion

    Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. (1982)

    …to 1968, the period in which most of the injury-producing exposure took place. Yet Eagle-Picher purchased general liability insurance in 1968, and continued to purchase it in increasing amounts throughout the 1970's, even…

  7. Court case · Florida District Court of Appeal · December 31, 1985 · in the opinion

    Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Cox (1985)

    …at 120. The rule against splitting was designed to function in precisely the opposite manner and to rigidly apply it here would do "violence to the essence and purpose of the general rule." Martinez-Ferrer v…

  8. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · December 28, 1988 · in the opinion

    Lac D'Amiante du Quebec v. American Home Assur. (1988)

    …$11.2 million in expenses (including legal fees). \[2\] LAQ did not sue Canadian General because LAQ had permitted it to purchase back its policies for the years 1962 through 1976 for approximately $1.7 million…

  9. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit · December 30, 1982 · in the opinion

    Murphree v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc. (1982)

    …Tennessee's various statutes of limitations governing products liability actions has created troublesome problems for Tennessee courts in the past two decades. In 1969 the Tennessee Supreme Court in Jackson v. General Motors, 223 Tenn. 12…

  10. Court case · Louisiana Supreme Court · February 24, 1986 · in the opinion

    Halphen v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1986)

    …reasons for the precepts and answers. 1. Legal Precepts There is general agreement upon the most basic principles of strict tort products liability. In order to recover from a manufacturer, the plaintiff must prove that the…

  11. Court case · Delaware Superior Court · August 23, 1983 · in the opinion

    Nutt v. AC & S., Inc. (1983)

    …claims of mental anguish asserted by the plaintiff-wives are alleged in the amended complaints in broad and general language but are actually of two distinct types: mental anguish resulting from the witnessing of the physical…

  12. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit · August 13, 1982 · in the opinion

    Neubauer v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1982)

    …to his health. We thus regard Wisconsin Natural Gas to be an exceptional application of the more general rule that the cause of action accrues when the asbestos-caused disease becomes diagnosable — e.g., provable by…

  13. Court case · Illinois Supreme Court · September 14, 1987 · in the opinion

    Zurich Insurance Co. v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1987)

    …1981, in an unrelated action construing the comprehensive general liability policy's coverage for asbestos-related diseases, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that each insurer on the risk from…

  14. Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · August 1, 1989 · in the opinion

    Mauro v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1989)

    …in the evaluation of the damage claim against the defendant. In this way, to the extent that men can achieve justice through general rules, a just balance of the warring interests is accomplished. \[Citations omitted\]. Cf…

  15. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 20, 1984 · in the opinion

    JT Thorp, Inc. v. Workers'comp. Appeals BD. (1984)

    …had progressed, but doctors decided against attempting surgery. Butler remains in general good health and bicycles daily. The sole medical opinion concluded that Butler was not disabled as of the time of the opinion, but annual…

  16. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · July 22, 1988 · in the opinion

    Millison v. EI du Pont de Nemours (1988)

    …Ed. 610, 617 (1939); U.S. v. Trotter, 529, F.2d 806 (3d Cir.1976); State v. General Restoration Co., 42 N.J. 366, 375 (1964); State v. Sherwin, 127 N.J. Super. 370 (App.Div…

  17. Court case · Florida District Court of Appeal · February 5, 1985 · in the opinion

    Meehan v. Celotex Corp. (1985)

    …of the negligent act. Indeed, as Gaboury itself says: "In determining the proper forum in which to bring suit under the general statute fixing venue where the cause of action \arose', or \accrued', the \injury occurred…

  18. Court case · Ohio Supreme Court · October 14, 1987 · in the opinion

    Goldman v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1987)

    …it is important to understand that both alternative liability and market-share liability are exceptions to the general rule that a plaintiff has to prove an injury was caused by the negligence of a particular defendant…

  19. Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · July 31, 1986 · in the opinion

    Fischer v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1986)

    …after which defendant Bell withdrew its appeal. In addition to its general argument that the case before us is one of great public importance, Johns-Manville's petition urges that the Appellate Division's determination runs…

  20. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · March 13, 1981 · in the opinion

    Hardy v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981)

    …to be persuaded that the choice of law made in Flatt is correct. That is, under any standard, federal law applies. Aerojet-General Corporation v. Askew, 511 F.2d 710 [\1361] (5th Cir. 1975); Willis v…