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

Search

12 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · June 30, 2014

    Barnes v. Foster Wheeler Corp. (2014)

    The district court granted General Electric's motion for summary judgment and dismissed all claims against GE with prejudice, because plaintiffs offered no admissible evidence that Barnes was exposed to an asbestos product made or supplied…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · March 17, 2011 · in the opinion

    Kiser v. AW Chesterton Co. (2011)

    …Plaintiff argues that either Virginia's General Assembly was aware of what Plaintiff sees as a national trend in favor of adoption of the separate disease rule and embodied this trend when it amended Virginia's…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · March 16, 2011

    Kiser v. AW Chesterton Co. (2011)

    Phyllis Kiser, as executor of her husband Orvin Kiser, Sr.'s estate, brought a wrongful death suit in October 2010 against a group of companies whose asbestos-containing products were alleged to have caused his mesothelioma. He was diagnosed with…

  4. Court case · Connecticut Appellate Court · September 8, 2015 · in the opinion

    Brochu v. Aesys Technologies (2015)

    …D & N Insulation Co.; Elliott Turbomachinery Co., Inc.; Fairbanks Morse Engines; Foster Wheeler Corp.; Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC; General Electric Co.; Georgia Pacific Corp.; Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.; Goulds Pumps, Inc.; Homasote Co.; IMO Industries, Inc.…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · February 24, 2000 · in the opinion

    Vasura v. Acands (2000)

    …448, 451 (9th Cir.1994). Others have held that the relevant time period for ascertaining foreign state status is that in which the conduct at issue took place. See General Electric Capital Corp. v. Grossman, 991…

  6. Court case · Delaware Superior Court · January 11, 2011

    Farrall v. Atlas Turner (In re Asbestos Litigation Limited TO Farrall, 2011)

    …holding the 1982 release barred James Farrall's new mesothelioma claims; the plaintiffs lost. A clear and unambiguous general release covering known and unknown, unmanifested injuries from asbestos exposure bars a later suit for a long…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · January 21, 1994 · in the opinion

    Tabolt v. Flintkote Co. (In re New York Asbestos Litigation, 1994)

    …at 982 F.2d 721 (2d Cir.1992), and the publication of numerous stories in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal — any well-informed citizen could possess general knowledge about Johns Manville, c.f.…

  8. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · November 6, 2001 · in the opinion

    Allied Signal, Inc. v. Herring (2001)

    …[\1036] Moreover, section 2 was enacted to extend the general limitations period in express recognition of the long latency period associated with asbestos-related diseases and illnesses. Extending the limitations period only for the very few…

  9. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · April 26, 1999 · in the opinion

    Holmes v. ACandS, Inc. (1999)

    …year discovery based statute of limitations applicable to product liability claims. The comprehensiveness of the medical malpractice act is evidence of the legislature's intent that it should prevail over the more general wrongful death statute…

  10. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · June 23, 1999 · in the opinion

    Lambert v. Babcock & Wilcox Co. (1999)

    …we must address two issues. First, we must assess the general features of the type of incident involved to determine whether the incident had "a potentially disruptive impact on maritime commerce." Id. (quoting Sisson v. Ruby…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii · December 9, 1986 · in the opinion

    In re Hawaii Federal Asbestos Cases (1986)

    …Moreover the Hawaii Court of Appeals has held that the introduction of concepts of "unreasonableness" and "foreseeability" into products liability confuses the jury and equates strict liability with negligence. Boudreau v. General Elec. Co., 2 Haw…

  12. Court case · Minnesota Court of Appeals · May 21, 2018 · in the opinion

    Conda v. Honeywell International, Inc. (2018)

    …causation experts were foundationally reliable and properly admitted" and that "those opinions established a prima facie case of general and specific causation using the legal standard established by the court when trial commenced." The district court…