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

Search

46 results for “General Electric”, page 1 of 3

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

    O'neil v. Crane Co. (2009)

    …General Electric Co. (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 830 \[71 Cal.Rptr.2d 817\] (Artiglio), on which the trial court here based its ruling, is no different. In that case, General Electric (GE) supplied bulk silicone…

  2. Court case · California Court of Appeal · December 21, 2007 · in the opinion

    Frastaci v. Vapor Corporation (2007)

    …supra, 272 U.S. at p. 611 . . . .) This effect on interstate commerce would be both "direct and substantial." (English v. General Electric Co. \[,supra,\] 496 U.S. \[at p.\] 85 . . . .) As Law explains, the imposition of…

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

    Merrill v. Leslie Controls, Inc. (2009)

    …retain an expert in every finished product manufacturer's line of business and second-guess the finished product manufacturer whenever any of its employees received any information about any potential problems.'" (Artiglio v. General Electric Co.

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

    Merrill v. Leslie Controls, Inc. (2009)

    …retain an expert in every finished product manufacturer's line of business and second-guess the finished product manufacturer whenever any of its employees received any information about any potential problems.'" (Artiglio v. General Electric Co.

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

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

    …specifications does not deprive them of the component parts defense. In Artiglio v. General Electric Co. (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 830 \[71 Cal.Rptr.2d 817\], the defendant manufactured silicone in accordance with "particular specifications…

  6. Court case · California Court of Appeal · August 25, 2009 · in the opinion

    Campbell v. American Standard, Inc. (2009)

    …difficult if not impossible, is irrelevant to the determination whether the forum is suitable unless \the alternative forum provides no remedy at all.' \[Citations.\]" (Guimei v. General Electric Co. (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 689, 696.)…

  7. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 22, 2007 · in the opinion

    Brumley v. Fdcc California, Inc. (2007)

    …to the heir.' \[Citations.\] Thus, in a wrongful death action the \injury' is not the general loss of the decedent, but the particular loss of the decedent to each individual claimant." (San Diego Gas & Electric, supra…

  8. Court case · California Supreme Court · December 19, 2005 · in the opinion

    Kinsman v. Unocal Corporation (2005)

    …by overhead electrical wires\]; see also Rest.2d Torts, § 343A \[possessor of land liable for obvious danger if "the possessor should anticipate the harm despite such. . . obviousness"\].) The question before us is how these general principles…

  9. Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 30, 2009 · in the opinion

    Short v. Sequoia Ventures, Inc. (2009)

    …offer competent and admissible evidence that Sequoia's predecessor in interest negligently or defectively designed and/or constructed the Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) power plant where Gary Short was allegedly exposed to asbestos…

  10. Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 16, 2003 · in the opinion

    Dekens v. Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (2003)

    …2d 916.) Centaur Manufacturing made a plastic plumbing pipe that was approved for listing by IAPMO in 1984 and 1985. (FNS Mortgage Service Corp. v. Pacific General Group, Inc., supra, 24 Cal.App.4th at p…

  11. Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 18, 2000 · in the opinion

    Wilson v. John Crane, Inc. (2000)

    …1141, 1145.) In 1978, the Supreme Court itself noted the seeming superiority of a term such as "\equitable apportionment or allocation of loss.'" (Daly v. General Motors Corp. (1978) 20 Cal.3d 725, 736, 144 Cal…

  12. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 2, 2001 · in the opinion

    Franklin v. Usx Corp. (2001)

    …extent these arose prior to the closing. In addition, we note that the bill of sale contained specific and clear provisions relating to the buyer's general non-assumption of liability. It stated that "\[t\]he…

  13. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 29, 2007 · in the opinion

    Bakkie v. Union Carbide Corporation (2007)

    …The court explained that the employer was a "sophisticated organization" and it did not have to be "told that gasoline is volatile and that sparks from an electrical connection or friction can cause ignition." (Ibid.) Subsequently…

  14. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 11, 2008 · in the opinion

    Norris v. Crane Company (2008)

    …the procedural matters. Therefore, we affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND\[2\] General Knowledge of Asbestos Hazards By 1930, it was well established in the medical and scientific communities that breathing asbestos fibers caused asbestosis, a scarring…

  15. Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 18, 2003 · in the opinion

    Kinsman v. Unocal Corp. (2003)

    …38 P.3d 1081). However, the observations in Grahn about general premises liability remain good law. In Grahn, as in the case before us, the premises owner challenged a generic jury instruction describing a landowner's…

  16. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 4, 2009 · in the opinion

    Ransom v. Calaveras Asbestos, Ltd. (2009)

    …pipe between 1971 and 1976. While working with asbestos cement pipe, Mr. Cookus used an electric saw to cut pipe in a trench. Dust would blow all over the place. Mr. Cookus worked with the Alex…

  17. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 27, 2009 · in the opinion

    Mahoney v. Georgia-Pacific, LLC (2009)

    …her work history sheets, from speaking to Joan and her attorney, and from his general knowledge of the work practices of using joint compound in installing drywall—which included sanding, which creates dust, and sweeping the…

  18. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 10, 2006

    Boyle v. Certainteed Corporation (2006)

    …judgment for CertainTeed, holding San Francisco's General Order No. 157 invalid, and remanded; plaintiffs recovered costs. A local court's general order allowing expedited summary judgment in asbestos cases on 60 days' notice, supported only…

  19. Court case · California Supreme Court · May 15, 2000

    Hamilton v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd. (2000)

    …Court reversed the Court of Appeal, holding that Mitchell's second action (for mesothelioma) was not time-barred and that Asbestos Corporation made a general appearance in the first action, so the plaintiffs prevailed on both…

  20. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 1, 2004 · in the opinion

    Coalition for Reasonable Regulation OF Naturally Occurring Substances v. California Air Resources Board (2004)

    …to serpentine if the physical and chemical conditions are right." Further, "\[t\]he occurrence of asbestos varies with different rock types and geologic conditions. In general, the vast majority of serpentine rock potentially contains asbestos. However…