8 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit · June 9, 1999
Harder v. ACandS (1999)
The Eighth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of summary judgment to General Electric, holding Iowa's statute of repose barred the Harders' claims against GE, and remanded for further proceedings. Under Iowa law, asbestos…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · July 8, 1988 · in the opinion
Knox v. AC & S, Inc. (1988)
…any site or area where a hazardous substance has been deposited, stored, disposed of, or otherwise come to be located." State v. General Electric Co., 592 F.Supp. 291, 295 (N.D. NY 1984) (citation omitted)…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · August 17, 1998 · in the opinion
Cimino v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1998)
…that exposure sufficient to cause asbestosis is also sufficient to cause mesothelioma, lung cancer, and pleural plaques. \[18\] The crafts were divided into four general groupings: "Production Crafts" (some thirteen in all, including e.g. pumper…
-
Company document · 1984
Celotex's Answers to Plaintiff's Master Interrogatories in Laird v. Celotex (1984)
…first warnings to 1972. Its answers give two reasons for making Careytemp asbestos-free in 1969: "the controversy" after a year of using amosite, and "the general acceptance of Dr. Selikoff's study". They also date…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · July 26, 1982 · in the opinion
Hardy v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)
…Borel, we conclude that Borel, while conclusive as to the general matter of a duty to warn on the part of manufacturers of asbestos-containing insulation products, is ultimately ambiguous as to certain key issues. As…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · November 12, 1990 · in the opinion
Cimino v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1990)
…to concurrently produce a single injury, the plaintiff may recover from the defendant for the entire injury. Shipp v. General Motors Corporation, 750 F.2d 418, 425-26 (5th Cir.1985). The plaintiff need only show…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Kansas · August 19, 1986 · in the opinion
Menne v. Celotex Corp. (1986)
…the cause in fact of his injuries does not undermine the principle that a defendant should only be held responsible for the damage it caused. As long as a plaintiff can prove general causation, i.e.…
-
Court case · Washington Supreme Court · April 27, 1989 · in the opinion
Sofie v. Fibreboard Corp. (1989)
…of Trial Lawyers of America; Richard H. Robblee on behalf of United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices, amici curiae for appellants. [\638] Kenneth O. Eikenberry, Attorney General, Michael E. Tardif, Senior Assistant, and Michael Madden, Assistant…