24 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 2
-
Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · March 22, 2019
Ford Motor Company v. Sheets (2019)
…trial court's one-sentence order denying Ford Motor Company's summary judgment motion and remanded for the trial court to state the basis for its ruling, leaving Ford's up-the-ladder immunity claim undecided…
-
Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · October 7, 2011
Rehm v. Ford Motor Company (2011)
The Court of Appeals affirmed the jury verdict and judgment for Ford Motor Company against the Rehm family, and held Ford's cross-appeal moot while addressing its merits. Evidence rulings are reviewed for abuse of…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · January 25, 2019
Johansen v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2019)
The magistrate judge recommended granting Ford Motor Company's summary judgment motion on the negligence, failure-to-warn and punitive damages claims, because Johansen's brake exposure was de minimis and Ford owed no duty to…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · August 10, 2018 · in the opinion
Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLC (2018)
(Ford MTE Castleman at 6.) However, the court notes that pursuant to Rule 703, an expert may disclose otherwise inadmissible underlying facts or data "if their probative value in helping the jury evaluate the opinion substantially…
-
Court case · Delaware Supreme Court · July 22, 2019
Richards v. Copes-Vulcan, Inc. (2019)
The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Copes-Vulcan, Ford and Goodyear and the denial of the Richards' request to supplement their expert report or for reargument. Under Ohio law, Ohio Rev. Code § 2307.96…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · September 17, 2018 · in the opinion
Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec, LLC (2018)
…the brands of brakes he worked on at Dexter, Mr. Jack testified that "\[s\]ome of them \[were\] Ford." (Id. at 131:17-20.) When Plaintiffs' counsel asked Mr. Jack if he used the arc grinder …
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 28, 2019 · in the opinion
Jack v. Dco, LLC (2019)
…those he encountered at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard." (Resp. DCo at 11; Resp. Ford at 12.) In particular, Plaintiffs emphasize that Mr. Jack testified in his deposition that, while he was working at the Shipyard…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 8, 2012
Adler v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2012)
Twenty-two plaintiffs, all represented by the same lawyers, sued more than eighty defendants in New York County for asbestos-related injuries or deaths. Seven had lung cancer, fourteen had pleural mesothelioma, and Glenda Vega had peritoneal…
-
Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · July 22, 2019 · in the opinion
Coffman v. Armstrong International, Inc. (2019)
…J., dissenting). In some cases, it has proven difficult to apply. See, e.g., Stockton v. Ford Motor Company, No. W2016-01175-COA-R3-CV, 2017 WL 2021760, at [\12]-15 (Tenn. Ct. App., filed May…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · June 20, 2017
Altman v. Ford Motor Co. (In re New York City Asbetos Litigation, 2017)
…Benicia Pump Repair Benicia 1950s-1980s; helper in boiler and furnace removal and installation stepfather's boiler and furnace business 1950s; worker at a construction products company 1970s; handyman 1970s and 1980s; union carpenter various construction…
-
Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · April 3, 2017 · in the opinion
Woo v. General Electric Company (2017)
…9\]. . . . In addition, there are some cases where the combination of two sound products creates a dangerous condition, and both manufacturers have a duty to warn. \[Ford Motor Co. v. Wood, 119 Md. App. 1, 34…
-
Court case · Washington Supreme Court · November 1, 2018 · in the opinion
Rublee v. Carrier Corp. (2018)
…Falk v. Keene Corp., 113 Wash.2d 645, 649, 782 P.2d 974 (1989) (quoting Lenhardt v. Ford Motor Co., 102 Wash.2d 208, 212, 683 P.2d 1097 (1984)). 1222 ¶ 56 In contrast, the apparent…
-
Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · June 26, 2017 · in the opinion
Rublee v. Carrier Corporation (2017)
…466, 472, 804 P.2d 659 (1991); RCW 4.22.920. \[22\] Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wn.2d 522, 452 P.2d 729 (1969) (applying § 402A strict product liability to manufacturers); Seattle-First Nat…
-
Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · June 26, 2016 · in the opinion
Rublee v. Carrier Corp. (2016)
…466, 472, 804 P.2d 659 (1991); RCW 4.22.920. \[22\] Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wash.2d 522, 452 P.2d 729 (1969) (applying § 402A strict product liability to manufacturers); Seattle-First Nat…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · January 25, 2012 · in the opinion
Rabovsky v. Goulds Pumps (In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (NO. VI), 2012)
…602 F.3d 152, 172 (3d Cir. April 7, 2010) (quoting Pineda v. Ford Motor Co., 502 F.3d 237, 243-44 (3d Cir. 2008)). As is the case with regard to the Federal Rules of…
-
Court case · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 2, 2017 · in the opinion
Poage v. Crane Co. (2017)
…a design defect when, "a design is itself inadequate, rendering the product unreasonably dangerous without regard to whether a warning is given\[.\]" Moore v. Ford Motor Co., 332 S.W.3d 749, 757 (Mo. banc 2011)…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · August 19, 2016 · in the opinion
Hillyer v. Mine Safety Appliances Co. (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2016)
…Cross Defendant, represented by Eileen M. Ford, Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien, Doherty & Kelly, P.C. & Megan Trocki Mantzavinos, Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien, Doherty & Kelly, P.C.. Mine Safety Appliances Company, Cross Defendant, represented by…
-
Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · June 30, 2015 · in the opinion
Russell v. Illinois Central Railroad Company (2015)
…Cir. 1987); Muzzleman v. Nat. Rail Passenger Corp., 839 F.Supp. 1094, 1096-1097 (D.Del. 1993); Ford v. Nat. R. Passenger Corp., 734 F.Supp. 215 (D.Md.1990); Lyons v. Southern Pacific Transp. Co.…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · July 28, 2016 · in the opinion
Hillyer v. ABB (In re Asbestos Litigation Hillyer, 2016)
…Cross Defendant, represented by Eileen M. Ford, Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien, Doherty & Kelly, P.C. & Megan Trocki Mantzavinos, Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien, Doherty & Kelly, P.C.. Mine Safety Appliances Company, Cross Defendant, represented by…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · August 9, 2016 · in the opinion
Winhauer v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2016)
…Defendant, represented by Eileen M. Ford, Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien, Doherty & Kelly, P.C. & Megan Trocki Mantzavinos, Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien, Doherty & Kelly, P.C.. Ingersoll Rand Company, Defendant, represented by Jessica Lee Tyler…