19 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals · July 6, 2001
State Ex Rel. Allman v. MacQueen (2001)
Several groups of asbestos plaintiffs, and defendant Mobil Oil, asked the West Virginia Supreme Court to stop a trial judge from carrying out a master plan for managing about 8,000 asbestos injury claims in Kanawha County. The claims had been…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · August 20, 2010 · in the opinion
Laverty v. CSX Transportation, Inc. (2010)
…ENPRO INDUSTRIES, INC., FLEXO SUPPLY COMPANY, FORD CORPORATION, GARLOCK, INC., GENERAL ELECTRIC MOTOR COMPANY, FOSTER WHEELER ENERGY COMPANY, GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION, GOODRICH CORPORATION, GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, GRIFFIN WHEEL COMPANY, HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Kentucky · February 14, 2007 · in the opinion
Fleischman v. CSX Transportation, Inc. (2007)
…Ctr., Inc., Ky., 807 S.W.2d 476 (1991)." Gafford v. General Electric Co., 997 F.2d 150, 165 (6th Cir. 1993). DISCUSSION As mentioned supra, the Defendant asserts that the 1986 release signed by Mr…
-
Court case · Illinois Supreme Court · March 22, 2012 · in the opinion
Simpkins v. CSX Transp., Inc. (2012)
…a matter of law. See, e.g., Martin v. Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co., 561 F.3d 439, 445 (6th Cir.2009); In re Certified Question From the Fourteenth District Court of Appeals of Texas, 479 Mich…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · November 20, 2012 · in the opinion
Neuer v. American Art Clay Co., Inc. (2012)
…Mr. Neuer testified that he was exposed to asbestos from working with steam lines and electrical equipment throughout his railroad career. He does not allude to asbestos exposure by reason of any other occupation. Defendants assert…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · March 5, 2014
Horvath v. Acf Indus., LLC (2014)
…signal inspector. Mr. Horvath also testified that, as a signal engineer for General Railway Signal, he was exposed over several months to asbestos from wires, cables and signal components on New York City subway projects. CSX…
-
Court case · U.S. Supreme Court · June 1, 2009 · in the opinion
CSX Transp., Inc. v. Hensley (2009)
…absent evidence that the fear was genuine and serious. Both courts affirmed decisions to reject genuine-and-serious instructions and to rely instead on general pain-and-suffering instructions to charge the jury. In so doing…
-
Court case · North Carolina Court of Appeals · March 7, 2006 · in the opinion
Williams v. CSX Transportation, Inc. (2006)
…range of facts that may be inquired into \[on cross-examination\] is virtually unlimited except by the general requirement of relevancy and the trial judge's discretionary power to keep the examination within reasonable bounds." State…
-
Court case · Georgia Court of Appeals · November 3, 2023 · in the opinion
Bowers v. CSX Transportation, Inc. (2023)
…917 F.2d at 964 (finding speculative testimony inadmissible). Moreover, Blickenstaff's opinion based on these studies often conflated general and specific causation. He stated that it was unnecessary to connect Luther's specific jobs to…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Columbia · March 2, 2010 · in the opinion
Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Ray EX rel. Boyd (2010)
…mplicit in the design of the Rail Act is the premise that in personam claims, including general unsecured claims asserting successor liability, would not and could not follow the assets conveyed to Conrail pursuant to the…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · April 24, 2018 · in the opinion
Jarrett v. Consol. Rail Corp. (2018)
…Accordingly, Jarrett argues that her claim should have gone before a jury for a determination as to whether lung cancer was a "known risk" and/or whether the release was unenforceable as a general boilerplate release…
-
Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · December 2, 2022 · in the opinion
Nuckols v. Consol. Rail Corp. (2022)
…Decedent reasonably did not know the purpose of the questioning. Perhaps Decedent could only have reasonably been expected to know of general impacts of the exposure to his health, but not that it could cause cancer…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · August 28, 2019 · in the opinion
Crowe v. CSX Transportation, Inc. (2019)
…and diagnosed with asbestosis after the 1972 Amendments, sought damages under LHWCA and general maritime law from the shipowner responsible for his asbestos exposure. The 1972 Amendments to the LHWCA "significantly restricted an injured longshoreman's…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · March 23, 2023 · in the opinion
Anderson v. Consolidated Rail Corporation (2023)
…used for choosing those studies. Appellee's Brief at 20. According to Conrail, Nothing in \[Dr.\] Levin's report suggested that he employed any methodology to opine on general causation, much less a generally accepted one…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · June 10, 2010 · in the opinion
Simpkins v. CSX Corp. (2010)
…required the New Jersey Supreme Court to apply general principles of duty similar to Illinois's to circumstances nearly identical to those present in the instant case. Satterfield involved a 25-year-old woman who died…
-
Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · December 22, 2016 · in the opinion
Arpin v. Consol. Rail Corp. (2016)
…626, 68 S.Ct. 296. Prior to the action, Callen had executed a general release relieving the railroad company from liability for personal injuries sustained in the occurrence. Id. at 626-627, 68 S.Ct. 296…
-
Court case · Tennessee Supreme Court · July 1, 2015 · in the opinion
Payne v. CSX Transportation, Inc. (2015)
…a diesel locomotive, inside the cab or just in the general area." He acknowledged that "diesel fumes would go \[\] into the air in the general direction back toward the caboose, the cab of the engine and…
-
Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · March 19, 2009 · in the opinion
Riedel v. Consolidated Rail Corporation (2009)
…make it into the final draft. The court stated that "while the General Assembly may well have intended all asbestos-related cancer claims to be subject to the new legislation, that intent is not clearly expressed…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · August 17, 2009 · in the opinion
Breedlove v. CSX Transp. Corp. (2009)
…based duties have become a "semantic morass." Kermarec v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 358 U.S. 625, 79 S.Ct. 406, 3 L.Ed.2d 550 (1959) (citing Kermarec v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 245 F.2d 175…