17 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit · January 31, 1990
Kraciun v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1990)
…Nemours & Co. plant, Clinton, Iowa Clinton 1953 onward (except Navy 1954-1958); service crew, general maintenance worker and electrical maintenance worker E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. plant, Clinton, Iowa Clinton 1948-1985; maintenance person…
-
Court case · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · August 24, 1989 · in the opinion
District of Columbia v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation (1989)
…hospitals, and government offices, are for the general use of the public, and hundreds or even thousands of people pass through each of them every day. Any child who grows up in the District and attends…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania · April 3, 1992 · in the opinion
Sealover v. Carey Canada (1992)
…the court must consider all evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. White v. Westinghouse Electric Company, 862 F.2d 56, 59 (3d Cir.1988). Evidentiary issues Defendants contend that: (1) plaintiff…
-
Product picture · Product Pictures
Label: RED TOP FIRECODE PLASTER (UNITED STATES GYPSUM COMPANY) (2)
…scan of a bag label for Red Top Firecode Plaster by United States Gypsum Company, with a USG logo and flame illustrations, beside a separate 'General Description' section heading graphic, on a page stamped Exhibit 214.
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Tennessee · January 9, 1984 · in the opinion
Johnson County, Tenn. v. US Gypsum Co. (1984)
While it is true that contractors who perform construction work for the state operated universities are not protected by general statutes of limitation, see Dunn v. W.F. Jameson and Sons, Inc., 569 S.W.2d…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · June 20, 2001 · in the opinion
Prudential Ins. Co. of America v. US Gypsum Co. (2001)
…is no need, therefore, to apply standards which pinpoint the date of a plaintiff's injury in a general claim for asbestos damages; the plaintiff has already specified its injury in its complaint. Prudential did not…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · June 18, 1990 · in the opinion
Cimino v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1990)
…under the circumstances of this action, Texas courts would carve out an exception to the general rule and allow punitive damages without proof of actual damages. The peculiar facts of this case create the rare circumstance…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · July 7, 1993 · in the opinion
Behrendt v. GAF Corp. (1993)
…fishing, woodworking. Mr. Behrendt's pain symptoms eventually led to a diagnosis of mesothelioma in December 1990. He was taken to the Emergency Room at Community General Osteopathic Hospital, Harrisburg, on December 23, 1990 with a…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · June 27, 1996 · in the opinion
Georgine v. Amchem Products, Inc. (1996)
…requirements of predominance and superiority. In In re General Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Products Liability Litigation, 55 F.3d 768 (3d Cir.) \[Hereinafter GM Trucks\], cert. denied sub nom. General Motors Corp. v…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio · November 17, 1988 · in the opinion
Adkins v. GAF Corp. (1988)
…sold by ACL is processed raw asbestos fiber. Asbestos exposure causes asbestosis. This fact was general knowledge in the asbestos industry in the State of Ohio at least after 1945. Not every exposure to asbestos, however…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · July 20, 1992 · in the opinion
Marinari v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd. (1992)
…TAMILIA, KELLY and JOHNSON, JJ. [\442] WIEAND, Judge: The general issue in this asbestos exposure action is whether Pennsylvania, in the context of asbestos actions, shall be a one-disease or two-disease state. More specifically…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · August 12, 1996 · in the opinion
Nelson v. Keene Corp. (1996)
…pleadings shall be according to the rules." 735 ILCS 5/2-201(a) (West 1994). General jurisdiction is invoked in the trial court when an action is filed and a summons is issued and served upon…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania · May 7, 1992 · in the opinion
Sealover v. Carey Canada (1992)
…112 S.Ct. 1671, 118 L.Ed.2d 391 (New Rule 238 withstands constitutional challenges on due process and equal protection grounds.); Leonard v. General Motors Corp., Civil No. 88-2380, slip op. at 5 (E…
-
Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware · February 19, 2003 · in the opinion
In re Usg Corp. (2003)
…In In re USG Corporation, one sees these general truths played out in detail. The debtors argues that "\[t\]he vast majority of asbestos personal injury suits filed today are meritless nonmalignant claims of minor pleural…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Kansas · May 2, 1991 · in the opinion
Harding v. Proko Industries, Inc. (1991)
…find Kansas or Texas law to be applicable to the plaintiff's claims. Section 6(2) of the Second Restatement identifies seven general considerations which are relevant to the resolution of a given conflict of laws…
-
Court case · Ohio Supreme Court · April 13, 1983 · in the opinion
O'stricker v. Jim Walter Corp. (1983)
…An action for bodily injury or injuring personal property shall be brought within two years after the cause thereof arose." In 1980, the General Assembly amended that statute by adding the following proviso, effective June 12…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · February 8, 1990 · in the opinion
Barnett v. City of Yonkers (1990)
…News 1426, 1428. In the Asbestos Act, Congress directed the Attorney General of the United States to ascertain the feasibility of recovering "from any person determined" to be liable the costs of detecting, removing, and replacing…