29 results for “General Electric”, page 1 of 2
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · July 26, 2023
Robichaux v. Huntington Ingalls Inc. (2023)
…shares of fault of those released parties if their fault is proven at trial. The plaintiffs said the releases covered only asbestosis, were too general, and were inadmissible. The court found the releases authenticated and admissible…
-
Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · December 31, 2007 · in the opinion
Penn v. A-Best Prods. Co. (2007)
…Rimmel, for appellee Mobil Corporation. Oldham & Dowling, Reginald S. Kramer, and Terri L. Nass, for appellees General Electric Company and CBS Corporation. Trenz, McKay & Knabe Co., LPA, and Tim McKay, for appellee R.E. Kramig. Tucker…
-
Court case · Illinois Supreme Court · October 25, 1989 · in the opinion
Board of Education v. A, C & S, Inc. (1989)
…the defendant (Sawyer, 89 Ill.2d at 384 (real estate brokers must follow the regulations created by the Department of Registration and Education); Heimgaertner v. Benjamin Electric Manufacturing Co. (1955), 6 Ill.2d 152, 153-54 …
-
Court case · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · August 24, 1989 · in the opinion
District of Columbia v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation (1989)
…hospitals, and government offices, are for the general use of the public, and hundreds or even thousands of people pass through each of them every day. Any child who grows up in the District and attends…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit · September 26, 1990 · in the opinion
Hoffman v. Allied Corp. (1990)
…however, that no asbestos products were used within the ordnance repair shop itself. [\1381] Leo Rapacilo was an electrician who worked in close proximity to asbestos products on the ships in dry dock at the shipyard…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · April 14, 2020
Graul v. Tecumseh Prods. Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2020)
…plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims against Tecumseh; the plaintiffs lost as to Tecumseh. New York courts lacked general jurisdiction over a corporation incorporated and headquartered in Michigan, and lacked specific jurisdiction under CPLR 302(a…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · December 14, 2004 · in the opinion
Rourke v. Amchem Products, Inc. (2004)
The general rule should be that in cases where a plaintiff could easily have joined in the earlier action or where, either for the reasons discussed above or for other reasons, the application of offensive estoppel…
-
Court case · U.S. Supreme Court · June 25, 1997 · in the opinion
Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor (1997)
"But the settlement does more than simply provide a general recovery fund," the Court of Appeals immediately added; "\[r\]ather, it makes important judgments on how recovery is to be allocated among different kinds of plaintiffs…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · February 28, 1986 · in the opinion
Joyce v. AC and S., Inc. (1986)
No ordinary disease of life to which the general public is exposed outside of the employment shall be compensable, except: (1) When it follows as an incident of occupational disease as defined in this title; or…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · March 1, 2019
Matter of Marzigliano v. Amchem Prods., Inc. (2019)
…judgment dismissing plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims, finding fact issues on general and specific causation. A defendant cannot win summary judgment by pointing to gaps in plaintiffs' proof; it must make a prima facie showing…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · January 11, 1982 · in the opinion
Bertrand v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)
…discretion to determine when it should be applied. The general rule should be that in cases where a plaintiff could easily have joined in the earlier action or where, either for the reasons discussed above or…
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · January 23, 2002 · in the opinion
Hoerner v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (2002)
…indicates that Employers Commercial Union Insurance Co. issued a primary commercial general liability policy to Eagle during each of the one-year periods when Home Insurance issued the excess policy. The personal injury limit for the…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · May 24, 1983 · in the opinion
Wedgeworth v. Fibreboard Corp. (1983)
…forum. Defendants have not shown that any hardship complained of is the result of proceeding to trial now. Nor is there a showing that the difficulties inherent in the general situation, including potential judicial inefficiency, constitute…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · July 26, 1982 · in the opinion
Hardy v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)
…Borel, we conclude that Borel, while conclusive as to the general matter of a duty to warn on the part of manufacturers of asbestos-containing insulation products, is ultimately ambiguous as to certain key issues. As…
-
Court case · Delaware Superior Court · August 23, 1983 · in the opinion
Nutt v. AC & S., Inc. (1983)
…claims of mental anguish asserted by the plaintiff-wives are alleged in the amended complaints in broad and general language but are actually of two distinct types: mental anguish resulting from the witnessing of the physical…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · June 27, 1996 · in the opinion
Georgine v. Amchem Products, Inc. (1996)
…requirements of predominance and superiority. In In re General Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Products Liability Litigation, 55 F.3d 768 (3d Cir.) \[Hereinafter GM Trucks\], cert. denied sub nom. General Motors Corp. v…
-
Court case · Ohio Supreme Court · October 14, 1987 · in the opinion
Goldman v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1987)
…it is important to understand that both alternative liability and market-share liability are exceptions to the general rule that a plaintiff has to prove an injury was caused by the negligence of a particular defendant…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · March 23, 1984 · in the opinion
Adams v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1984)
…a "less desirable longshoreman" in the future. Id. at 668. Bonura is inapposite to the case at bar. Bonura was decided under general maritime law, not Louisiana law. Furthermore, the instant record does not support an…
-
Court case · Wisconsin Supreme Court · October 27, 1999 · in the opinion
Sopha v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1999)
…Wisconsin would not turn a deaf ear to argument that in a particular sort of case the policy reasons [\236] for allowing an exception override the policy reasons for applying the general rule. 236 Patzer v…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · June 3, 1985 · in the opinion
Gideon v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1985)
…Court has expressly held, in Turner v. General Motors Corporation,\[36\] that, although evidence of the expectations of the ordinary consumer and the care of a prudent manufacturer may be introduced at trial, "henceforth in the…