7 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina · December 29, 2014 · in the opinion
Sparkman v. AW Chesterton Company (2014)
…Pa. July 29, 2011) (finding a duty to warn where defendant knew asbestos-containing replacement brakes would be used on its vehicles); Chicano v. General Electric Co., 2004 WL 2250990, at [\6] (E.D. Pa. 2004…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina · November 13, 2018 · in the opinion
Matthews v. EI DU Pont DE Nemours and Company (2018)
…Section 42-1-400 provides an exception to the general rule by imposing upon an owner or upstream employer liability for the payment of compensation benefits to worker who is not directly employed by the owner…
-
Court case · South Carolina Court of Appeals · February 13, 2019 · in the opinion
Keene v. Cna Holdings, LLC (2019)
…an employee of a subcontractor commissioned to install an electrical system at a plant "being constructed for \[the defendant\] by a general contractor" was not the defendant's statutory employee because his work "was not a…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina · March 29, 2018
Chesher v. 3M Company (2018)
…specific causation expert testimony, the plaintiff must present evidence of the amount and duration of asbestos dust exposure, and general allegations of periodic exposure over many years are not enough. Causation; Expert Testimony; Maritime Law and…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina · February 13, 2017 · in the opinion
Chesher v. 3M Company (2017)
…t is \[\] unfair to require manufacturers of nondefective products to shoulder a burden of liability when they derived no economic benefit from the sale of the products that injured the plaintiff").\[16\] As a general matter…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina · January 27, 2016 · in the opinion
Dandridge v. Crane Co. (2016)
…injuries, and consequently, less justification for a departure from the general rule under maritime law that "a manufacturer is not liable for harm caused by, and owes no duty to warn of the hazards inherent in…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina · July 21, 2017 · in the opinion
Haskins v. 3M Company (2017)
…tested; (2) has been subjected to peer review and publication; (3) has a known or potential rate of error; and (4) has attained general acceptance in the pertinent scientific community. See id. at 593-94. In…