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 19 of 22

  1. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · March 23, 1984 · in the opinion

    Jackson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1984)

    …not prove that he presently suffers from that disease. In arguing that the cancer evidence was properly admissible, Jackson relies on the general rule of tort law that allows for recovery of all harms — past, present…

  2. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit · July 23, 1985 · in the opinion

    Commercial Union Ins. Co. v. Sepco Corp. (1985)

    …asbestos insulation products between 1970 and 1979. Its general liability insurance coverage during that time and until the filing of this suit consisted of a series of successive policies, each of which was issued by one…

  3. Court case · Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court · March 24, 1983 · in the opinion

    Asbestos Insul. Co. v. Wcab (McGOVERN) (1983)

    …the fact that Mr. McGovern was exposed to asbestos in this short period of time that you mentioned might probably have aggravated his general pulmonary status because of being exposed to the offending agent. You see…

  4. Film · Films · 1982

    Videotaped Deposition of Clifford L. Sheckler (1982)

    …construction projects at that location. In 1942 to 1946, I served in the Corps of Engineers attached to the 20th Bomber Command and General Chennault's Flying Tigers, the 14th Air Force. From 1946 to 1952…

  5. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · July 27, 1988 · in the opinion

    Blazek v. Nicolet, Inc. (1988)

    …We disagree. • 1 The general intent of statutes of repose is to "terminate the possibility of liability after a defined period of time, regardless of a potential plaintiff's lack of knowledge of his cause of…

  6. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit · April 13, 1989 · in the opinion

    Kaiser v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (1989)

    …late 1985 or early 1986 that he suffered from asbestosis. The Kaisers filed this lawsuit seeking general and special damages for Kaiser's asbestos-related injuries on August 15, 1986. III. All parties accept in their…

  7. Court case · Maine Supreme Judicial Court · January 17, 1984 · in the opinion

    Austin v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc. (1984)

    …at 799; Prosser, supra at 522. Recent cases typified by Daly v. General Motors Corp., 20 Cal.3d 725, 575 P.2d 1162, 144 Cal.Rptr. 380 (1978) (ordinary contributory negligence of plaintiff to be considered…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Kansas · September 13, 1989 · in the opinion

    Menne v. Celotex Corp. (1989)

    …stipulation of the parties, the plaintiff makes a general argument in her brief that all Kansas law is inapplicable since the parties agreed prior to the previous trial to apply Nebraska law. In the stipulation filed…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · March 1, 1983 · in the opinion

    Carter v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1983)

    …been even reasonably knowable. The supplier would thus be free of culpability, but a price of his doing business is to protect people from danger from his products — or to pay. General Motors Corp. v. Hopkins…

  10. 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…

  11. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · December 30, 1985 · in the opinion

    Martin v. American Petrofina, Inc. (1985)

    …Anderson, the insulation contractor, testified that as a general rule, a mastics insulation job could be expected to last five to ten years before it began to break down by becoming brittle and cracking. D.A…

  12. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii · December 9, 1986 · in the opinion

    In re Hawaii Federal Asbestos Cases (1986)

    …Moreover the Hawaii Court of Appeals has held that the introduction of concepts of "unreasonableness" and "foreseeability" into products liability confuses the jury and equates strict liability with negligence. Boudreau v. General Elec. Co., 2 Haw…

  13. Court case · Pennsylvania Supreme Court · January 27, 1984 · in the opinion

    Doe v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1984)

    …June 27, 1978 is broad in its scope and is to be liberally construed,\[3\] but is not without its limitations. In its general provision it states: Courts of record, within their respective jurisdictions, shall have…

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

    Fusco v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1981)

    …1975) is not in point. In Kellum, the court determined that the United States in general was not subject to state statutes of limitations; however, nothing in the opinion indicates that a state statute of limitations…

  15. Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Illinois · March 9, 1987 · in the opinion

    In re Unr Industries, Inc. (1987)

    …what is unclear is the extent to which such noncreditors can be bound by the case in general and the plan in particular. There is no doubt that those exposed before the petition and individuals who…

  16. Court case · Washington Supreme Court · October 15, 1987 · in the opinion

    Lockwood v. AC & S, Inc. (1987)

    …jury. The evidence before the jury included expert testimony on asbestos and the disease of asbestosis, the dangerousness of asbestos to individuals in general and to shipyard workers, and the effects of combining smoking with asbestosis…

  17. 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…

  18. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · April 25, 1980 · in the opinion

    Flatt v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1980)

    …is of the opinion that federal law governs the issue of collateral estoppel application in this diversity of citizenship action. The Court is persuaded that the reasoning underlying the decision in Aerojet-General Corporation v. Askew…

  19. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Columbia · October 28, 1981 · in the opinion

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

    …The defendants' first argument is that plaintiff's "survival" claim is time-barred under the law of the District of Columbia, which provides that the general period of limitations is three years. See D.C.Code …

  20. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts · August 14, 1989 · in the opinion

    Eagle-Picher Ind. v. American Employers'ins. (1989)

    …Roger [\1057] L. Prickett, plaintiff's general counsel, through his earlier testimony, confirmed that a large number of cases have settled at relatively early stages in the litigation process and that those files may contain no…