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

Search

16 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · September 11, 2019 · in the opinion

    Rowe v. Bell & Gossett Company (2019)

    …successor-in-interest to Victor and Spicer; ECR International, Inc., as successor-in-interest to Dunkirk Radiator Corporation; General Electric Company; General Plumbing Supply, Inc., as successor-in-interest to Ridgewood Corp.; HB Smith Co., Inc.…

  2. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · June 29, 2018 · in the opinion

    Rowe v. Bell & Gossett Company (2018)

    …interest to Victor and Spicer; ECR INTERNATIONAL, INC., as successor-in-interest to Dunkirk Radiator Corporation; GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY; GENERAL PLUMBING SUPPLY, INC., as successor-in-interest to Ridgewood Corp.; HB SMITH CO., INC.; HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL…

  3. Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · October 13, 2016 · in the opinion

    Murray v. Dana Companies (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2016)

    …Thomen, Esq., (860) 275-6700, [email protected]., for General Electric Company. Matthew C. Oleyer, Esq., (617) 217-5500, [email protected]., for General Insulation Company. Jason Caron, Esq., (781) 556-0600, [email protected]., for…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · June 8, 2018 · in the opinion

    Finch v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2018)

    …526 (N.D. Cal. 2009) ("A general concern over litigation does not trigger a duty to preserve evidence."). Ms. Finch has not shown that Pfizer reasonably should have known that the pre-1978 records may have…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 17, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …and makes Volkswagen vehicles, asked to be dismissed because Washington courts lacked personal jurisdiction over it. The court found no general jurisdiction, since Volkswagen AG is neither incorporated nor based in Washington. It also found no…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 17, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court found no general jurisdiction because the company was not at home in Washington. It found no specific jurisdiction because the plaintiffs did not allege that the…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 17, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …where the plaintiff's exposure occurred in Toronto. General jurisdiction was lacking because the defendant was not at home in Washington. Personal Jurisdiction Worksites: Toronto worked with brakes and clutches on Volkswagen vehicles Toronto 1986-1994

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 17, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …employees or agents in Washington. The plaintiffs argued that WCD sold talc to Johnson & Johnson for nationwide distribution in cosmetic products. The court found no general jurisdiction, which the plaintiffs did not dispute. On specific jurisdiction…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 23, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …in Ohio, asked to be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court agreed. It found no general jurisdiction, because Dana Companies is neither incorporated nor headquartered in Washington. It found no specific jurisdiction either. The…

  10. Court case · Delaware Superior Court · November 16, 2011 · in the opinion

    Gordon v. Dana Companies (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2011)

    Jun. 9, 2011) (TRANSCRIPT). \[27\] See, e.g., Chavers v. General Motors Corp., 79 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Ark. 2002). \[28\] In re: Asbestos Litig. (Bowser), C.A. No. N10C-05-104 ASB (Jun. 3…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · December 21, 2015 · in the opinion

    Viera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2015)

    …8, 2008). However, the movant must identify material witnesses and supply a general description of what their testimony will cover. Steck, 2015 WL 3767445, at [\3] (citation omitted). Defendants report that they are likely to call…

  12. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · August 22, 2018 · in the opinion

    Finch v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2018)

    …517, 526 (N.D. Cal. 2009) ("A general concern over litigation does not trigger a duty to preserve evidence."). Absent a duty to retain destroyed records, there can be no spoliation. IV. Motion to Strike MNRM…

  13. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 2, 2016 · in the opinion

    Unterleitner v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2016)

    …19, 2010) ("\[S\]ettlement is insufficient to confer removal jurisdiction where the formal dismissal of the non-diverse defendant has not yet been entered.") (citations omitted); Guerrero v. General Motors Corp., 392 F. Supp. 2d 1133…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · December 12, 2012 · in the opinion

    Williams v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2012)

    …to this lawsuit allege that BASF management was aware of the liability risk posed by the Westfall action discovery not only to the Westfall action itself but to BASF's asbestos claim risk management in general…

  15. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · August 16, 2018 · in the opinion

    Finch v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2018)

    …Gen. Stat. Ann. § 1D-5(7) (West 2018). A general awareness of danger is not enough to establish a conscious disregard of a known duty. Lee v. CertainTeed Corp., No. 5:13-CV-826-FL, 2015…

  16. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 15, 2016 · in the opinion

    DePREE v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2016)

    …auto body filler from Grand Auto, and it came in cans bearing the name "Bondo." Although Mr. DePree testified in general terms about his work involving Bondo, with one exception, he was unable to recall the…