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

Search

12 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · September 11, 2019 · in the opinion

    Rowe v. Bell & Gossett Company (2019)

    …successor-in-interest to Victor and Spicer; ECR International, Inc., as successor-in-interest to Dunkirk Radiator Corporation; General Electric Company; General Plumbing Supply, Inc., as successor-in-interest to Ridgewood Corp.; HB Smith Co., Inc.…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 26, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)

    …of America, Inc. (Rec. Doc. 739), Foster-Wheeler LLC (Rec. Docs. 693, 726, 730), General Electric Company (Rec. Docs. 702, 705), and ViacomCBS Inc. (Rec. Docs. 727, 729), plaintiffs' respective oppositions to each motion (Rec. Docs…

  3. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · June 29, 2018 · in the opinion

    Rowe v. Bell & Gossett Company (2018)

    …interest to Victor and Spicer; ECR INTERNATIONAL, INC., as successor-in-interest to Dunkirk Radiator Corporation; GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY; GENERAL PLUMBING SUPPLY, INC., as successor-in-interest to Ridgewood Corp.; HB SMITH CO., INC.; HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL…

  4. Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · October 13, 2016 · in the opinion

    Murray v. Dana Companies (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2016)

    …Thomen, Esq., (860) 275-6700, [email protected]., for General Electric Company. Matthew C. Oleyer, Esq., (617) 217-5500, [email protected]., for General Insulation Company. Jason Caron, Esq., (781) 556-0600, [email protected]., for…

  5. Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 5, 2009 · in the opinion

    Crowder V AW Chesterton Co. (2009)

    …date the party last parted with possession or control of the product" constituted a substantive law (see, Connecticut General Statute §52-577\[a\]). In Blatz v. Westinehouse Electric Corp., 274 A.D.2d 491 (2nd Dept.…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 17, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …and makes Volkswagen vehicles, asked to be dismissed because Washington courts lacked personal jurisdiction over it. The court found no general jurisdiction, since Volkswagen AG is neither incorporated nor based in Washington. It also found no…

  7. Court case · New York Supreme Court · May 23, 2018

    Chen v. Volkswagen Group of America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2018)

    …asked to dismiss the case because Texas was a more convenient forum. The court held that it lacked general jurisdiction over Volkswagen and Nissan. It found long-arm jurisdiction proper because Chen's testimony and the…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 17, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court found no general jurisdiction because the company was not at home in Washington. It found no specific jurisdiction because the plaintiffs did not allege that the…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 17, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …where the plaintiff's exposure occurred in Toronto. General jurisdiction was lacking because the defendant was not at home in Washington. Personal Jurisdiction Worksites: Toronto worked with brakes and clutches on Volkswagen vehicles Toronto 1986-1994

  10. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 23, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …in Ohio, asked to be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction. The court agreed. It found no general jurisdiction, because Dana Companies is neither incorporated nor headquartered in Washington. It found no specific jurisdiction either. The…

  11. Court case · Delaware Superior Court · November 16, 2011 · in the opinion

    Gordon v. Dana Companies (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2011)

    Jun. 9, 2011) (TRANSCRIPT). \[27\] See, e.g., Chavers v. General Motors Corp., 79 S.W.3d 361, 368 (Ark. 2002). \[28\] In re: Asbestos Litig. (Bowser), C.A. No. N10C-05-104 ASB (Jun. 3…

  12. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 30, 2013 · in the opinion

    Steiner v. Volkswagen Group OF America, Inc. (2013)

    …fn. 22. As defendants point out, Ledesma referred to the scope of expert cross-examination in general, as set forth in section 721, subdivision (a), and did not address the limits of permissible cross-examination regarding…