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 · Pennsylvania Superior Court · September 21, 2004

    Jessop v. Acf Industries, LLC (2004)

    …Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Topeka shops and rail yard; Topeka, Kansas rail yard of Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway, Topeka electrician Topeka, Kansas rail yard of Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Topeka sixteen year career

  2. Court case · South Carolina Court of Appeals · June 11, 2001 · in the opinion

    Murphy v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (2001)

    …Corporation, ACandS, Inc., Rock Wool Manufacturing Co., Inc., The Anchor Packing Company, Rapid American Corporation, Garlock, Inc., Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Uniroyal, Inc., PPG Industries, Inc., Covil Corporation, E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Company, Defendants…

  3. Court case · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 22, 1990 · in the opinion

    Hagen v. Rapid American Corp. (1990)

    …512.020 RSMo. 1986. We first address this latter question. The right of appeal exists solely by virtue of statute. Harris v. Union Electric Co., 685 S.W.2d 607, 611 (Mo.App. 1985). Section 512…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · June 4, 1991

    Bergeron v. Celotex Corp. (1991)

    …1989. He had worked for Foster Wheeler as an ironworker from February to March 1967, when it was the general contractor building a steam generator at a plant in Michoud, Louisiana. Plaintiffs did not dispute that…

  5. Court case · Minnesota Supreme Court · May 14, 1982 · in the opinion

    DeCosse v. Armstrong Cork Co. (1982)

    …the court concluded that because the tolling provisions of the general limitations statute were in existence prior to the enactment of the wrongful death statute the legislature "could not possibly have had in mind that the…

  6. Court case · Wisconsin Supreme Court · October 27, 1999 · in the opinion

    Sopha v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1999)

    …Wisconsin would not turn a deaf ear to argument that in a particular sort of case the policy reasons [\236] for allowing an exception override the policy reasons for applying the general rule. 236 Patzer v…

  7. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · February 20, 1998 · in the opinion

    Ruckstuhl v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)

    …The "minimum contacts" prong of the test can be broken down into two types of personal jurisdiction, specific and general. A state exercises "specific jurisdiction" over a non-resident defendant when the lawsuit arises from or…

  8. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 13, 1996 · in the opinion

    Hansen v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1996)

    …is one of the four plaintiffs in the wrongful death action of Mary Hansen. [\761] (5) "The general rule is that \an appeal reviews the correctness of a judgment as of the time of its rendition…

  9. 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…

  10. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · September 4, 1997 · in the opinion

    In re Celotex Corp. (1997)

    …exposure thereto.... (J.A. 44-45). Rapid's claim against the Celotex bankruptcy estate was principally based upon a written agreement entitled "General Assignment & Assumption of Liabilities," (J.A. 52), wherein Celotex's predecessor in interest…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · January 14, 1994 · in the opinion

    Coates v. AC and S, Inc. (1994)

    …599 So.2d at 1062 n. 13. \[10\] Johnstone was a case under the general maritime law which adopted Louisiana law as the law of the adjacent state. \[11\] Defendants contend that the use of OSHA…

  12. 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…