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

Search

19 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · August 31, 2007

    Asbestos Corporation Limited v. Akaiwa (2007)

    …summary judgment is limited to the materials designated to the trial court, so evidence first offered on appeal is not considered. Product Identification; Trial Procedure and Discovery Worksites: Everett Electric electrical contractor Everett Electric 1980-1982

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · January 9, 2017 · in the opinion

    Grimes v. AT&T Corp. (2017)

    …LLP. FOSTER WHEELER CORPORATION, Cross Defendant, represented by CHRISTOPHER J. KEALE, SEDGWICK LLP & DAVID SCHUYLER BLOW, SEDGWICK LLP. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Cross Defendant, represented by CHRISTOPHER J. KEALE, SEDGWICK LLP & DAVID SCHUYLER BLOW, SEDGWICK LLP. IMO…

  3. Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 12, 1998 · in the opinion

    Arena v. Owens Corning Corp. (1998)

    …reach the consumer in the same condition as it left the manufacturer\]; and Artiglio v. General Electric Co. (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 830, 71 Cal.Rptr.2d 817 \[silcone supplier not liable to user of…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · July 8, 1988 · in the opinion

    Knox v. AC & S, Inc. (1988)

    …any site or area where a hazardous substance has been deposited, stored, disposed of, or otherwise come to be located." State v. General Electric Co., 592 F.Supp. 291, 295 (N.D. NY 1984) (citation omitted)…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · October 23, 2017 · in the opinion

    Jack v. Asbestos Corporation, Ltd. (2017)

    …Marks, SEDGWICK LLP & Erin P. Fraser, SEDGWICK LLP. Gardner-Denver Inc, Defendant, represented by Claude Bosworth, RIZZO MATTINGLY BOSWORTH PC. General Electric Company, Defendant, represented by Christopher S. Marks, SEDGWICK LLP & Erin P. Fraser, SEDGWICK LLP…

  6. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · August 17, 1998 · in the opinion

    Cimino v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1998)

    …that exposure sufficient to cause asbestosis is also sufficient to cause mesothelioma, lung cancer, and pleural plaques. \[18\] The crafts were divided into four general groupings: "Production Crafts" (some thirteen in all, including e.g. pumper…

  7. Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 29, 2014 · in the opinion

    Brown v. Bell & Gossett Co. (2014)

    …contractors were "essentially restrained from taking independent action without first obtaining Con Edison's approval"; 2) 1958 Articles of General Conditions, arguing that its specifications and drawings were binding on the contractors and rendered Con Edison …

  8. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · March 28, 2001 · in the opinion

    Abadie v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (2001)

    …and Johnny Johnson. CBS Corporation, formerly known as Westinghouse Electric Corporation (hereinafter referred to as Westinghouse), settled and dismissed their appeals with all plaintiffs but Earlven Gauthe and Johnny Johnson after oral argument, but days before…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana · May 8, 2014 · in the opinion

    Genusa v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd. (2014)

    …Accordingly, this court has held that the current version of 28 U.S.C. § 1441 allows removal of general maritime claims without requiring an additional source of federal jurisdiction. See Garza v. Phillips 66 Co., No…

  10. 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…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · March 13, 1981 · in the opinion

    Hardy v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981)

    …to be persuaded that the choice of law made in Flatt is correct. That is, under any standard, federal law applies. Aerojet-General Corporation v. Askew, 511 F.2d 710 [\1361] (5th Cir. 1975); Willis v…

  12. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · November 6, 2013 · in the opinion

    Morvant v. Asbestos Corporation Limited (2013)

    …C. § 1332(a). In removal cases, as a general rule, "diversity of citizenship must exist both at the time of filing in state court and at the time of removal to federal court." Coury v. Prot…

  13. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · July 27, 1988 · in the opinion

    Blazek v. Nicolet, Inc. (1988)

    …We disagree. • 1 The general intent of statutes of repose is to "terminate the possibility of liability after a defined period of time, regardless of a potential plaintiff's lack of knowledge of his cause of…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · June 17, 2014 · in the opinion

    Morvant v. Maryland Casualty Company (2014)

    …2010) (Duval, J.). In RepublicBank, the Fifth Circuit considered state and federal actions involving the same general subject matter and sharing a common issue, the validity of a promissory note. 828 F.2d at 1121. The…

  15. Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 23, 1996 · in the opinion

    Kellogg v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd. (1996)

    …two statutes, a court must construe the statutes in the context of the entire statutory system of which they are a part in order to achieve harmony with other statutes on the same general subject. This…

  16. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · December 15, 1988 · in the opinion

    Whatley v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (1988)

    …474 (5th Cir.1985); see Shipp v. General Motors Corp., 750 F.2d 418, 425 (5th Cir.1985) (Duncan placed the allocative burden of comparative causation on the defendant). Sufficiency of the Evidence Whatley contends that…

  17. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · November 9, 2001 · in the opinion

    Emery v. Owens-Corporation (2001)

    …suitable references to plaintiff's closing argument), we issue a precautionary warning that the general reference to "witnesses" in its admissibility assertion skirts the outer perimeter of Rule 2-12.4. \[9\] See La. Acts 1979…

  18. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · May 30, 1980 · in the opinion

    Migues v. Nicolet Industries, Inc. (1980)

    …in recognition of certain policy concerns, pro rata apportionment between joint tortfeasors. The Court has noted with some emphasis the later decision of the Texas Supreme Court in General Motors Corporation v. Simmons, 558 S.W…

  19. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · August 7, 2019 · in the opinion

    Rogers v. Asbestos Corp. Limited (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2019)

    …2d 1116 (Del. Super. 1986). It is well-established that a plaintiff does not meet his burden of proof by simply placing the product at the general work site. Conway v. A.C.& S, C.A…