6 results for “Owens-Illinois”
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan · April 25, 1989
Anjeski v. Keene Bldg. & Development Co. (1989)
The district court granted summary judgment to defendants Keene, Celotex and Owens-Illinois, ruling that plaintiff Irene Anjeski's sole product identification deposition could not support a jury finding that her husband was exposed to their…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit · April 13, 1989
Kaiser v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (1989)
Sol Kaiser, a Navy veteran, and his wife and children sued several asbestos manufacturers in federal court in Puerto Rico for harm from his asbestos exposure. Kaiser served from 1948 to 1952, repairing insulated pipes on destroyers, where he cut and…
-
Court case · Florida District Court of Appeal · February 5, 1985
Meehan v. Celotex Corp. (1985)
Carmella Meehan, as personal representative of her husband Charles Meehan's estate, sued Celotex and other asbestos product makers, claiming their products caused his death. Charles worked at the Brooklyn Navy Yard from 1942 to 1945, where he was…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · September 11, 1986
Vigiolto v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1986)
Antoinette Vigiolto sued several asbestos product manufacturers after her husband, Christopher Vigiolto, died of pleural mesothelioma in 1981. He served in the Navy from 1943 to 1945 on two ships, and she alleged he inhaled asbestos dust and fibers…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan · January 14, 1987
Marshall v. Celotex Corp. (1987)
…applying Michigan law, rejected three. Alternative liability failed because not all possible suppliers, including Owens-Corning and Johns-Manville, were sued. Market share liability was unsuitable because asbestos products differ in harmfulness, and nothing showed the…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan · August 18, 1988 · in the opinion
Marshall v. Celotex Corp. (1988)
…defendants' motion for judgment is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. \[1\] Johns-Manville Corporation and Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corporation. Plaintiff did not name Johns-Manville because it had filed for bankruptcy status. \[2\] Contra Abel v…