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

Search

39 results for “Owens-Corning Fiberglas”, page 1 of 2

  1. Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 10, 2023

    Wilgenbusch v. Metalclad Insulation LLC (2023)

    …Owens Corning (Kaylo) and later Fiberboard (Pabco). A jury found Metalclad liable for design defect, failure to warn, and negligent failure to warn. It assigned Metalclad 7 percent of responsibility and 12 percent each to Owens…

  2. Court case · California Court of Appeal · December 11, 2020 · in the opinion

    Booker v. Imerys Talc America, Inc. (2020)

    …included in the verdict form because they bear strict liability for his injuries. (See Arena v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 1178, 1187-1191 \[strict products liability applies to suppliers of raw…

  3. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 25, 2021 · in the opinion

    Putt v. Ford Motor Co. (In re Laosd Asbestos Cases, 2021)

    …does not equal absolute liability. (Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 987, 994.) Because all Ford offered the jury was a "vague impression that \[the\] other products \[were\] somewhat similar," because Ford…

  4. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 19, 2020 · in the opinion

    Mata v. Liberty Utilities (park Water) Corp. (2020)

    …2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 292, 332.) III. Section 3294 Punitive damages serve the dual public purposes of punishment and deterrence. (Stevens v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 1645, 1658; see § 3294…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 23, 2021 · in the opinion

    Toy v. Armstrong Int'l (In re Asbestos, 2021)

    …from asbestos\] was neither known nor knowable by the application of scientific knowledge available at the time of manufacture and/or distribution" of the product. See Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 53 Cal. 3d 987…

  6. Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 22, 2024 · in the opinion

    Williams v. JM Manufacturing Company, Inc. (2024)

    …to adequately warn of those potential risks, and that the lack of sufficient warning was a substantial factor in causing Cornelius's harm. (Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 987, 1002, 993…

  7. Court case · California Court of Appeal · August 30, 2024 · in the opinion

    Brooks v. Mission Stucco Company (2024)

    …presented to the jury." (Saller, supra, 187 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1231-1232; Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 987, 995; Barker v. Lull Engineering Co. (1978) 20 Cal.3d 413…

  8. Court case · California Court of Appeal · June 4, 2021 · in the opinion

    Swanson v. The Marley-Wylain Co. (2021)

    …than one proximate cause of an injury" such that multiple "causes frequently operate concurrently so that \[they\] constitute a direct proximate cause of the resulting harm." (Allen v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1997) 225 Mich.App…

  9. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 29, 2024 · in the opinion

    Watts v. Pneumo Abex, LLC (2024)

    …no evidence of sufficient sustainability to support the claim or defense of the party opposing the motion...." (Howard v. Owens Corning (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 621, 629-630 \[85 Cal.Rptr.2d 386\].) "On appeal…

  10. Court case · California Court of Appeal · September 13, 2021 · in the opinion

    Vanni v. Honeywell International, Inc. (2021)

    …reasonable inference and resolving conflicts in support of the judgment. (Howard v. Owens Corning (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 621, 630). In an asbestos-related injury case, causation involves two elements: exposure and substantial factor causation…

  11. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 30, 2021 · in the opinion

    Webb v. General Cable Corp. (2021)

    …every reasonable inference and resolving all conflicts in support of the judgment. (Howard v. Owens Corning (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 621, 630.) B. Analysis Defendant contends plaintiffs failed to meet their burden on the threshold…

  12. Court case · California Court of Appeal · September 21, 2021 · in the opinion

    Ann Strobel v. Johnson & Johnson (2021)

    …25 Cal.4th at p. 850), which here is the preponderance of the evidence (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953, 965 (Rutherford)). "\On appeal "\[w\]e review a grant of summary judgment…

  13. Court case · California Court of Appeal · December 23, 2022 · in the opinion

    Bader v. Johnson & Johnson (2022)

    …with negligence, product liability, and concealment instructions that incorporated the asbestos-specific standard of proof for causation set forth in Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953 \[67 Cal.Rptr.2d 16, 941…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 19, 2021 · in the opinion

    Toy v. Armstrong Int'l (In re Asbestos, 2021)

    …Dkt. No. 418 at 5. But Plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing that exposure to Defendants' products was a substantial factor causing his illness. See Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal. 4th 953, 982 (Cal…

  15. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit · August 3, 2021 · in the opinion

    Viale v. Foster Wheeler, LLC (2021)

    …a triable issue of fact that Ronald was exposed to asbestos-containing Foster Wheeler products and therefore that exposure was a "substantial factor" causing Ronald's mesothelioma. Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 941 P.2d 1203…

  16. Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 22, 2020 · in the opinion

    Gibbons v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer (Laosd Asbestos Cases, 2020)

    …was a substantial factor causing the illness by showing that in reasonable medical probability it was a substantial factor contributing to the plaintiff's or decedent's risk of developing cancer." (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc…

  17. Court case · California Court of Appeal · August 5, 2021 · in the opinion

    Leavitt v. Johnson & Johnson (2021)

    …prejudicial error and affirm. BACKGROUND A. A plaintiff seeking to hold a manufacturer liable for asbestos-related latent injuries must satisfy a two-part causation test. (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953…

  18. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit · October 1, 2021 · in the opinion

    Dietrich v. Boeing Company (2021)

    …successor in interest to Mason-Neilan Regulator Company and Annin Valve Co.; METALCLAD INSULATION LLC, FKA Metalclad Insulation Corporation; OWENS-ILLINOIS, INC., individually and as successor in interest to Owens-Illinois Glass Company; SOCO WEST, INC.…

  19. Court case · California Court of Appeal · June 21, 2021 · in the opinion

    Benavidez v. Fluor Corp. (2021)

    …a particular exposure or series of exposures was a \legal cause' of his injury, i.e., a substantial factor in bringing about the injury." (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953, 982-983…

  20. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 26, 2021 · in the opinion

    Toy v. Honeywell Int'l (In re Asbestos, 2021)

    …ago. See, e.g., Brodkin Report at 64. Defendant first cites to the California Supreme Court's opinion in Rutherford v. Owens Illinois, Inc., regarding the proof of causation required in asbestos-related cases. 16 Cal…