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

Search

31 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 2

  1. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 15, 2007

    Honer v. Ford Motor Company (2007)

    The Court of Appeal reversed the summary judgments for Ford Motor Company and Merck & Co. and remanded with directions to deny both motions, so plaintiff Eileen Honer prevailed on appeal. Under Code of Civil Procedure section…

  2. Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · December 5, 2005

    Snyder v. Ford Motor Co. (2005)

    …Workers' Compensation; Trial Procedure and Discovery Worksites: Clingerman facility; Ford Motor Company Lima plant; General Dynamics Lima facility; General Dynamics facility, Lima; Clingerman facility, Bellefontaine; Ford Motor Company, Lima employee General Dynamics facility Lima 1984-1993;…

  3. Court case · Arkansas Supreme Court · July 5, 2002

    Chavers v. General Motors Corp. (2002)

    The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment for General Motors, AlliedSignal and Ford, rejecting the claims of Deidra Chavers over her husband's mesothelioma death. Arkansas adopts the 'frequency, regularity, and proximity…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · October 31, 2008

    Kummer v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2008)

    The court denied Viacom's summary judgment motion because genuine factual disputes remained on causation, and granted Ford's and GM's unopposed motions, so Mrs. Kummer's claims against Viacom go forward. Under general maritime…

  5. Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · February 25, 2005

    Rehm v. Navistar International (2005)

    …the appellees (including Allied Chemical, DuPont, Ford, GE, Kentucky Utilities Ghent Powerhouse, LG&E Cane Run and Mill Creek), Louisville millwright Facilities owned by the appellees (including Allied Chemical, DuPont, Ford, GE, Kentucky Utilities Ghent Powerhouse…

  6. Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · March 13, 2008 · in the opinion

    Woody v. AW Chesterton Company (2008)

    …are A.W. Chesterton Company; Advance Auto Parts, Inc.; Bayer CropScience, Inc.; Borg Warner Morse TEC, Inc.; Breeding Insulation Company, Inc.; Breeding Insulation Company, Chattanooga, Inc.; CBS Corporation; CertainTeed Corporation; Crane Company; Ford Motor Company; Foster…

  7. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · December 9, 2009 · in the opinion

    Bourque v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (2009)

    …Polk, Schell, etal., New Orleans, LA, for Defendants/Appellees, General Motors, Ford Motor Company. Court composed of JIMMIE C. PETERS, MARC T. AMY and MICHAEL G. SULLIVAN, Judges. AMY, Judge. Former employee and wife brought personal…

  8. Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · October 14, 2009 · in the opinion

    Nye v. Bayer Cropscience, Inc. (2009)

    …its employees of the dangerous nature of the product was the proximate cause of the accident." Whitehead, 775 S. W. 2d 593, 599 — 600 (citing Ford Motor Company v. Wagoner, 183 Tenn. 392, 192 S.W…

  9. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit · January 27, 2009 · in the opinion

    Martin v. Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company (2009)

    …II. ANALYSIS A. Standard of Review As this is a diversity action, Kentucky substantive law applies. Gahafer v. Ford Motor Co., 328 F.3d 859, 861 (6th Cir. 2003). Procedurally, federal standards for summary judgment govern…

  10. Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 25, 2009 · in the opinion

    Taylor v. Elliott Turbomachinery Co. Inc. (2009)

    …2001) 26 Cal.4th 465, 478-479 \[110 Cal.Rptr.2d 370, 28 P.3d 116\], quoting Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co. (1964) 61 Cal.2d 256, 261 \[37 Cal.Rptr. 896, 391 P.2d 168…

  11. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · May 4, 2006 · in the opinion

    Robinson v. Crown Cork & Seal Co., Inc. (2006)

    …893 S.W.2d at 518. A. The Applicable Law. A special law is defined as one "\limited to a particular class of persons distinguished by some characteristic other than geography.'" Ford Motor Co. v. Sheldon…

  12. Court case · Washington Supreme Court · December 11, 2008 · in the opinion

    Braaten v. Saberhagen Holdings (2008)

    …in Simonetta, common law product liability claims like those here\[4\] are governed by the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A (1965),\[5\] adopted in Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wash.2d 522, 531-32, 452…

  13. Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · November 10, 2008 · in the opinion

    Kimball v. Asbestos Corporation Ltd. (2008)

    …her\] product, and (b) the user or consumer has not bought the product from or entered into any contractual relation with the seller. \[16\] See Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wn.2d 522, 532, 452…

  14. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · August 29, 2008 · in the opinion

    Satterfield v. Crown Cork & Seal Co., Inc. (2008)

    …because it is applicable to a substantial class and its classifications are reasonable. A special law is limited to a particular class of persons distinguished by some [\240] characteristic other than geography. Ford Motor Co. v…

  15. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · December 3, 2008 · in the opinion

    Benard v. Eagle, Inc. (2008)

    …the general speedy manner in which this Court handles applications for rehearing when this Court is notified of the urgency of the need for prompt action. In Centanni v. Ford Motor Co., 93-1133 (La.App…

  16. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio · May 2, 2003 · in the opinion

    Lindstrom v. AC Products Liability Trust (2003)

    …at hand and the reasoning is sound [\588] and persuasive, citation to and reliance on the unpublished opinion is appropriate. Bob Tatone Ford, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 197 F.3d 787, 790 (6th Cir.1999)…

  17. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 17, 2009 · in the opinion

    Merrill v. Leslie Controls, Inc. (2009)

    …which makes them better able to insure that the component is suitable for their specific applications. (Springmeyer v. Ford Motor Co. (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 1541, 1554 \[71 Cal.Rptr.2d 190\].) Liability of a…

  18. Court case · California Court of Appeal · September 25, 2009 · in the opinion

    Merrill v. Leslie Controls, Inc. (2009)

    …which makes them better able to insure that the component is suitable for their specific applications. (Springmeyer v. Ford Motor Co. (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 1541, 1554 \[71 Cal.Rptr.2d 190\].) Liability of a…

  19. Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · March 6, 2009 · in the opinion

    Cardinal Industrial Insulation Co., Inc. v. Norris (2009)

    …jury instruction in every duty supported by the facts\[.\]" Id. We believe the trial court satisfied that entitlement with a liability instruction — its Instruction No. 1 — substantively indistinct from that in Ford Motor Co. v. Fulkerson…

  20. Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · February 14, 2005 · in the opinion

    Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc. (2005)

    …103 Wash.2d 768, 774, 698 P.2d 77 (1985). ANALYSIS In Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wash.2d 522, 452 P.2d 729 (1969), the Washington Supreme Court adopted the Restatement (Second) of Torts…