14 results for “General Electric”
-
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 · New York Supreme Court · August 29, 2014 · in the opinion
Brown v. Bell & Gossett Co. (2014)
…contractors were "essentially restrained from taking independent action without first obtaining Con Edison's approval"; 2) 1958 Articles of General Conditions, arguing that its specifications and drawings were binding on the contractors and rendered Con Edison …
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · March 28, 2001 · in the opinion
Abadie v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (2001)
…and Johnny Johnson. CBS Corporation, formerly known as Westinghouse Electric Corporation (hereinafter referred to as Westinghouse), settled and dismissed their appeals with all plaintiffs but Earlven Gauthe and Johnny Johnson after oral argument, but days before…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · May 7, 1986
Silver v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1986)
…§ 1-50(6), barred the claim because his last exposure was in 1961. The Fourth Circuit agreed that the statute applies to wrongful death actions in general. It held, however, that the statute did not apply…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · May 24, 1983 · in the opinion
Wedgeworth v. Fibreboard Corp. (1983)
…forum. Defendants have not shown that any hardship complained of is the result of proceeding to trial now. Nor is there a showing that the difficulties inherent in the general situation, including potential judicial inefficiency, constitute…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · March 13, 1981 · in the opinion
Hardy v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981)
…to be persuaded that the choice of law made in Flatt is correct. That is, under any standard, federal law applies. Aerojet-General Corporation v. Askew, 511 F.2d 710 [\1361] (5th Cir. 1975); Willis v…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · July 27, 1988 · in the opinion
Blazek v. Nicolet, Inc. (1988)
…We disagree. • 1 The general intent of statutes of repose is to "terminate the possibility of liability after a defined period of time, regardless of a potential plaintiff's lack of knowledge of his cause of…
-
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, District of Hawaii · December 9, 1986 · in the opinion
In re Hawaii Federal Asbestos Cases (1986)
…Moreover the Hawaii Court of Appeals has held that the introduction of concepts of "unreasonableness" and "foreseeability" into products liability confuses the jury and equates strict liability with negligence. Boudreau v. General Elec. Co., 2 Haw…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · February 5, 1986 · in the opinion
Jenkins v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1986)
…The purpose of class actions is to conserve "the resources of both the courts and the parties by permitting an issue potentially affecting every \[class member\] to be litigated in an economical fashion." General Telephone Co…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · December 15, 1988 · in the opinion
Whatley v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (1988)
…474 (5th Cir.1985); see Shipp v. General Motors Corp., 750 F.2d 418, 425 (5th Cir.1985) (Duncan placed the allocative burden of comparative causation on the defendant). Sufficiency of the Evidence Whatley contends that…
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · November 9, 2001 · in the opinion
Emery v. Owens-Corporation (2001)
…suitable references to plaintiff's closing argument), we issue a precautionary warning that the general reference to "witnesses" in its admissibility assertion skirts the outer perimeter of Rule 2-12.4. \[9\] See La. Acts 1979…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · May 30, 1980 · in the opinion
Migues v. Nicolet Industries, Inc. (1980)
…in recognition of certain policy concerns, pro rata apportionment between joint tortfeasors. The Court has noted with some emphasis the later decision of the Texas Supreme Court in General Motors Corporation v. Simmons, 558 S.W…
-
Court case · Ohio Court of Common Pleas · January 12, 1987 · in the opinion
Lavelle v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1987)
…developing cancer in the future. Ohio courts have not specifically addressed the issue presented here but the general policy of this state has been to permit recovery for reasonable apprehension of a potential harm flowing from…