No fee unless we recover compensation for your family Text size 833-4-ASBESTOS (833-427-2378) Free Case Review

Search

11 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut · July 16, 2002 · in the opinion

    Yale University v. Cigna Ins. Co. (2002)

    …In that case, the court concluded that repair and replacement costs incurred by the insured on account of damage to electrical transformers caused by a design defect were not "ensuing losses." Id. In support of its…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · November 18, 2014 · in the opinion

    Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Company (2014)

    MICHAEL COMARDELLE, v. PENNSYLVANIA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL., Section I. Civil Action No. 13-6555. November 18, 2014. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. ORDER AND REASONS LANCE M. AFRICK, District Judge. Before the…

  3. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · May 27, 1986 · in the opinion

    Zurich Ins. Co. v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1986)

    Waters testified that in the 1940's, comprehensive general-liability policies were sold for a period of either one year or three years, and that during that time period all original policies were sequentially numbered and…

  4. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit · December 13, 1995 · in the opinion

    Stonewall Ins. Co. v. Asbestos Claims Management (1995)

    …FM Insurance Company, Republic Insurance Company, First State Insurance Company, United States Fire Insurance Company, Houston General Insurance Company, Twin City Fire Insurance Company, Old Republic Insurance [\1179] Company, American Centennial Insurance Company, The Constitution State…

  5. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · March 18, 2009 · in the opinion

    Hymel v. Eagle, Inc. (2009)

    …362 (La. 1980). It follows that the compromise instrument is governed by the same general rules of construction applicable to contracts. Brown, 630 So.2d at 748. When the words of a contract are clear and…

  6. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · December 28, 1988 · in the opinion

    Lac D'Amiante du Quebec v. American Home Assur. (1988)

    …$11.2 million in expenses (including legal fees). \[2\] LAQ did not sue Canadian General because LAQ had permitted it to purchase back its policies for the years 1962 through 1976 for approximately $1.7 million…

  7. Court case · Illinois Supreme Court · September 14, 1987 · in the opinion

    Zurich Insurance Co. v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1987)

    …1981, in an unrelated action construing the comprehensive general liability policy's coverage for asbestos-related diseases, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that each insurer on the risk from…

  8. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit · July 30, 1999 · in the opinion

    Blanding v. Director, Owcp (1999)

    …was timely filed" based on § 930(f) tolling provision). Respondents cite a single Board ruling to the contrary. See Speedy v. General Dynamics Corp., 15 BRBS 352, 355 (1983). However, we owe no deference to decisions…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · July 31, 1985 · in the opinion

    Lac D'Amiante Du Quebec v. Am. Home Assur. Co. (1985)

    …While all have held for the insureds, most commonly in declaratory judgment actions seeking to clarify the parties' rights and obligations under Comprehensive General Liability (CGL) policies, the courts have offered conflicting interpretations of the manner…

  10. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · December 5, 2000 · in the opinion

    Brunet v. Avondale Industries, Inc. (2000)

    …should be held strictly liable for the injuries that Brunet sustained. The trial court did not err in awarding Brunet $250,000 in general damages. I do not believe that the award is beyond that which…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · April 12, 2007 · in the opinion

    Bradley v. Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation (2007)

    …to establish their safety and warning-related activities were under the requisite direction of a federal officer. Federal direction requires "more than \general auspices' of a federal officer, or participation in a regulated industry." Savoie v…