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

Search

9 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · New York Supreme Court · October 21, 2013

    Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation v. AW Chesterton Co., Inc. (2013)

    Seven plaintiffs, or their estates, brought asbestos injury suits in New York County. Six had mesothelioma and one, Perez, had lung cancer. Their cases were part of an "In Extremis" trial group, and they asked for a joint trial. Their alleged…

  2. 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…

  3. Court case · New York Supreme Court · May 17, 2013 · in the opinion

    Frieder v. Long Is. RR (2013)

    …clean the counters, clean the — you know, clean that area up so that other people could sit down." The LIRR employees who patronized the diner belonged to trade unions. They included electricians, carpenters, machinists, and metal…

  4. 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…

  5. 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…

  6. 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…

  7. 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…

  8. 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…

  9. 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…