17 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · December 28, 2000 · in the opinion
Hollingsworth v. Connor (2000)
…appropriate. Appellants assert that a determination as to whether there was insufficient knowledge of the manufacturer or of the scientific field in general would have been relevant in order to determine whether the Kent cigarettes, and…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · August 27, 2010 · in the opinion
Saller v. Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc. (2010)
…omitted.) Here, the jury's findings on negligent failure to warn therefore do not preclude a finding that the trial court erred in failing to instruct on strict liability. (See Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp. v. Superior…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · May 24, 2010
Larson v. Georgia Pacific (In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, 2010)
The court denied all four Daubert motions, allowing plaintiffs' causation experts (Brody, limited to general causation, and Legier), defense industrial hygienist Dyson's dose reconstruction testimony, and defendants' causation experts to testify. Expert testimony is admissible…
-
Court case · Florida Supreme Court · October 15, 2018 · in the opinion
DeLisle v. Crane Co. (2018)
…in every proceeding. However, this Court's case law makes clear that a proper and thorough application of Frye allows the trial judge to inquire [\1235] beyond bare assertions of general acceptance. Daubert, on the other…
-
Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware · May 20, 2013 · in the opinion
In re Specialty Products Holding Corp. (2013)
…Tr. 1/11/13 at 91:16-21 (Vasquez). Dr. Vasquez also considered whether Debtors' experience is in line with general trends in asbestos litigation. Tr. 1/11/13 at 91:22-92:13 (Vasquez). That…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · April 9, 2008
Barnes v. AO Smith Water Products Co. (2008)
…the Montross, Perdicaro, Enea and Iqbal cases separate, over the defendants' general opposition. Under CPLR 602(a), actions with common questions of law or fact may be tried jointly. The Malcolm factors guide the choice, and…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Central District of California · June 14, 2012 · in the opinion
Couscouris v. Hatch Grinding Wheels, Inc. (2012)
…2012. United States District Court, C.D. California. CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL GEORGE H. KING, District Judge. Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order re: Motion for Remand and for Award of Costs Incurred This matter is before us on…
-
Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · February 14, 2014 · in the opinion
McGuire v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014)
…been a strictly personal choice, yet it was a thing of comfort and convenience to himself while he was serving as maintenance man and general custodian and while he was on call at all hours. Therefore…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · December 26, 2001 · in the opinion
Burns v. AP Green Industries, Inc. (2001)
… John Crane, Inc.; DAP, Inc.; Fibreboard Corporation; GAF Corporation; General Refractories Company; Harbison-Walker Refractories Company; Harcros Chemicals, Inc., as Successor-in-Interest to Thompson-Hayward Chemical Company; Kaiser Refractories, A Division of Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · December 12, 2018 · in the opinion
Prokocimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2018)
…continuing general belief that exposure to asbestos below the TLV of the time period of 5 million particles per cubit foot ("mppcf") of air did not represent a hazard to workers. There was no general recognition…
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · February 20, 1998 · in the opinion
Ruckstuhl v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)
…The "minimum contacts" prong of the test can be broken down into two types of personal jurisdiction, specific and general. A state exercises "specific jurisdiction" over a non-resident defendant when the lawsuit arises from or…
-
Court case · Missouri Court of Appeals · June 19, 2012 · in the opinion
Wagner v. Bondex International, Inc. (2012)
…fiber that began or caused the process that resulted in mesothelioma, but that asbestos fiber in general is the only known cause of the disease. Dr. Maddox also testified that mesothelioma results from an individual's…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 13, 2009 · in the opinion
Silvestro v. Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc. (2009)
…to chrysotile." \[3\] Although Silvestro again worked in construction after his career as boiler repairman, the evidence showed that use of asbestos in construction materials (and in general) was being curtailed by the 1970's, and…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · August 5, 2009 · in the opinion
Anderson v. Bondex Int'l (In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, 2009)
…address the standards pertaining to relation back, and then proceed to apply those standards to the case before us. Relation Back in General Relation back is governed by Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(c) which provides…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · August 30, 2018 · in the opinion
Steiner v. Hollingsworth & Vose Company (2018)
…s Brief, at 1. "Collateral review is appropriate, despite the general directive that appellate courts conduct review only of final orders, if an order is (1) separable from and collateral to the main cause of action, …
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 22, 2008 · in the opinion
Behshid v. Bondex International, Inc. (2008)
…in sanding the tiles. Also, there was no evidence of a general nature. There was no evidence as to what type of tiles would have been used in Iran 35 years ago. There was no evidence…
-
Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · March 29, 2010 · in the opinion
Asbury v. AW Chesterton Company (2010)
…Forum Non Conveniens 1 Standard of Review The doctrine of forum non conveniens allows "a court \[to\] resist imposition upon its jurisdiction even when jurisdiction is authorized by the letter of a general venue statute." Kedy…