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

Search

11 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 30, 2021

    Pizarro v. National Steel and Shipbuilding Company (2021)

    Renato Pizarro and his wife sued NASSCO, Pep Boys and other companies, alleging his mesothelioma came from asbestos exposure. The opinion describes two sources. One was the Navy overhaul of the USS Bristol County, where plaintiffs say NASSCO removed…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · November 9, 2021

    Data v. AO Smith Corporation (2021)

    Darlene Data sued many companies in her own right and as executrix of her husband Michael Data's estate. Mr. Data served in the Navy aboard the USS Newport News from 1969 to 1973. He later worked at Mesta Machine and then at the West Pittsburgh…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · April 5, 2024 · in the opinion

    Speck v. CBS Corporation (2024)

    …Speck was to any work done on or around a General Electric product or product of another defendant\[,\]" and has "no idea" about the quantity of asbestos fibers to which Speck may have been exposed by…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · July 28, 2016 · in the opinion

    Hillyer v. ABB (In re Asbestos Litigation Hillyer, 2016)

    …Shawn Edward Martyniak, Swartz Campbell LLC. Eaton Corporation, Cross Defendant, represented by Joseph S. Naylor, Swartz Campbell LLC. General Electric Company, Cross Defendant, represented by Beth E. Valocchi, Swartz Campbell LLC. Gould Electronics Inc., Cross Defendant…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut · February 19, 2015 · in the opinion

    Bray v. Ingersoll-Rand Co. (2015)

    …24 (Crane); 84:6-24 (same). He was able to recall only the brands Westinghouse and General Electric without prompting. Choate was prompted to describe certain elements of the products he recalled, such as their label…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · June 24, 2024 · in the opinion

    Marcus v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2024)

    …causation standard, and then arguing that the second "substantial factor" prong is not met). Only in its reply does Eaton raise doubts about Plaintiff's actual bystander exposure to its asbestos-containing electrical products. Dkt. No…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 30, 2021

    Toy v. Armstrong Int'l (In re Asbestos, 2021)

    …motion to exclude plaintiffs' expert Dr. Brody (he may give general but not specific causation testimony) and denied Warren Pumps' and Honeywell's motion to exclude "every exposure" testimony, without prejudice to renewed objections at trial…

  8. Court case · Arizona Supreme Court · August 21, 2013 · in the opinion

    Pounders v. Enserch E & C, Inc. (2013)

    …light of § 175's comment (a), which states that "the law applicable to wrongful death is selected by the same principles as control selection of the law applicable to personal injuries in general (see § 146)." ¶ 20…

  9. Court case · Arizona Court of Appeals · April 17, 2012 · in the opinion

    Pounders v. Enserch E & C, Inc. (2012)

    …1971) ("The fact ... that one of the parties is domiciled ... in a given state will usually carry little weight of itself."); Ferren v. General Motors Corp., 137 N.H. 423, 427, 628 A.2d 265 (1993…

  10. Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 10, 2023 · in the opinion

    Wilgenbusch v. Metalclad Insulation LLC (2023)

    …has held that comparative fault principles apply when apportioning liability between a strictly liable party and a negligent party. (See e.g., Daly v. General Motors Corp. (1978) 20 Cal.3d 725, 736-737; Safeway Stores…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · July 20, 2018 · in the opinion

    Clayton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2018)

    …negligence, premises liability, conspiracy, and strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities. (SAC § V.) They seek general and special damages for pain, suffering, "loss of spousal relationship," disability, medical expenses, and economic loss. (Id.) Saberhagen moves for…