13 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · July 7, 2022
Elorreaga v. Rockwell Automation, Inc. (2022)
The court granted General Electric and ViacomCBS's motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims for punitive damages and loss of consortium damages under general maritime law, but denied it as to the California negligence and strict…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · June 28, 2017
Herman v. Ametek (In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (NO. VI), 2017)
Maynard Herman and his wife Irene sued Ametek, Inc. and other companies in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. They alleged that Mr. Herman's work exposed him to asbestos and that he developed mesothelioma. Defendants removed the case to federal…
-
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…
-
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…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Central District of California · September 6, 2013 · in the opinion
Lara v. CBS Corp. (2013)
…2013. United States District Court, C.D. California. CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL AUDREY B. COLLINS, District Judge. Proceedings: ORDER Granting Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand (In Chambers) Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' Motion to Immediately Remand Plaintiffs…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 30, 2023 · in the opinion
Elorreaga v. Rockwell Automation, Inc. (2023)
…reliability, the Court "assess\[es\] the \[expert's\] reasoning or methodology, using as appropriate such criteria as testability, publication in peer reviewed literature, and general acceptance." Id. at 564. III. DISCUSSION As an initial matter, the…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · June 7, 2016 · in the opinion
Murphy v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. (2016)
…with a motion and proposed order to have the exceptions set for hearing, in state court. In general, "\[a\] waiver of the right to remove must be clear and unequivocal." Furthermore, as explained in Bourdier v…
-
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…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · October 28, 2019 · in the opinion
Kardos v. Armstrong Pumps, Inc. (2019)
…Note: Rule 1035.2 sets forth the general principle that a motion for summary judgment is based on an evidentiary record which entitles the moving party to judgment as a matter of law. \ \ \ Pa.R.C…