10 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · Kentucky Supreme Court · December 16, 2010
Certainteed Corporation v. Dexter (2010)
…Premises Owner Liability; Fault, Apportionment and Settlement Credits; Trial Procedure and Discovery Worksites: General Electric plant (Mount Vernon), Mount Vernon pipefitter General Electric plant (Mount Vernon) Mount Vernon 1969-1971; pipefitter 1963-1964; pipefitter 1946-1984
-
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…
-
Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · July 20, 2001 · in the opinion
Black v. ACandS, Inc. (2001)
…concluded that the plaintiff in McIntosh was not entitled to a remedy under Section 12 because "the General Assembly has determined that injuries occurring ten years after the product was delivered to a user are not…
-
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…
-
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.…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · January 10, 2002 · in the opinion
Harris v. AC & S., Inc. (2002)
…1995), trans. denied. In general, product liability actions must be brought within two years after the cause of action accrues or within ten years after the delivery of the product to the initial user or consumer…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · September 30, 1999 · in the opinion
Porter Hayden Company v. Wyche (1999)
…to the earliest diagnosis, from adenocarcinoma is 13.2 years." Although Porter Hayden seems to take issue in its reply brief with the use of general epidemiological testimony to draw inferences in specific cases, in Grimshaw…
-
Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · March 25, 2003 · in the opinion
Harris v. AC & S., Inc. (2003)
…was proximately caused by his exposure to asbestos-containing products provided by the Defendants. The Indiana General Assembly has enacted two statutes that limit the period of time within which individuals can file product liability claims…