Search

• Organization: Forty-Eight Insulations, Inc. ×
• Organization: Insurance Company of North America ×
• Clear filters

16 results for “General Electric”

1. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · March 2, 1994

   Atkinson v. Celotex Corp. (1994)

   …Service Refinery approximately 35 years; electrician Cities Service Refinery 22 years; various crafts Cities Service Refinery 18 years; pipe fitter Cities Service Refinery 35 years; general craft foreman Cities Service Refinery 32 years; laborer Cities Service…

2. 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…

3. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Columbia · January 30, 1981

   Keene Corp. v. Insurance Co. of No. America (1981)

   …Liberty), holding that coverage is triggered by exposure to asbestos, and denied Aetna's challenge to jurisdiction. Under occurrence-based general liability policies, coverage for asbestosis, mesothelioma and bronchogenic carcinoma is triggered by the claimant's…

4. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit · October 21, 1980

   Ins. Co. North America v. Forty-Eight Insulations (1980)

   …Affiliated FM, Illinois National and Liberty Mutual lost, and Forty-Eight and Travelers largely won. Under standard comprehensive general liability policies, 'bodily injury' from asbestosis occurs when tissue damage begins on inhalation of fibers, not at…

5. Court case · Louisiana Supreme Court · May 28, 1992 · in the opinion

   Cole v. Celotex Corp. (1992)

   …the Tab?, 48 Fordham L.Rev. 657, 684 n. 152 (1980) (quoting Elliott, The New Comprehensive General Liability Policy, in Liability Insurance Disputes 12-3, 12-5 (S. Schreiber ed. 1968)); See also Nothstein, Toxic Torts…

6. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · January 11, 1982 · in the opinion

   Bertrand v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)

   …discretion to determine when it should be applied. The general rule should be that in cases where a plaintiff could easily have joined in the earlier action or where, either for the reasons discussed above or…

7. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · July 26, 1982 · in the opinion

   Hardy v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)

   …Borel, we conclude that Borel, while conclusive as to the general matter of a duty to warn on the part of manufacturers of asbestos-containing insulation products, is ultimately ambiguous as to certain key issues. As…

8. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 20, 1984 · in the opinion

   JT Thorp, Inc. v. Workers'comp. Appeals BD. (1984)

   …had progressed, but doctors decided against attempting surgery. Butler remains in general good health and bicycles daily. The sole medical opinion concluded that Butler was not disabled as of the time of the opinion, but annual…

9. 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…

10. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit · October 1, 1981 · in the opinion

    Keene Corp. v. Ins. Co. of North America (1981)

    …Jaeger 1959). An insurance contract represents an exchange of an uncertain loss for a certain loss. In a comprehensive general liability insurance policy, the uncertain loss is the possibility of incurring legal liability, and the certain…

11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan · May 4, 1978 · in the opinion

    Ins. Co. of No. Am. v. Forty-Eight Insulations (1978)

    …lawsuits. D. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Cases dealing with statute of limitation issues are not applicable to this coverage problem. See, Tijsseling v. General Accident, Fire & Life Assurance Corp., Ltd., 55 Cal.App.3d 623, 127 Cal…

12. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Columbia · October 28, 1981 · in the opinion

    Fearson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981)

    …The defendants' first argument is that plaintiff's "survival" claim is time-barred under the law of the District of Columbia, which provides that the general period of limitations is three years. See D.C.Code …

13. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit · July 30, 1982 · in the opinion

    Wilson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)

    …first action may expressly reserve plaintiff's right to maintain second action). \[35\] Johns-Manville has catalogued an impressive array of court decisions exemplifying the general res judicata rule against splitting an indivisible cause of action…

14. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · June 17, 2014 · in the opinion

    Morvant v. Maryland Casualty Company (2014)

    …2010) (Duval, J.). In RepublicBank, the Fifth Circuit considered state and federal actions involving the same general subject matter and sharing a common issue, the validity of a promissory note. 828 F.2d at 1121. The…

15. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · September 11, 1986 · in the opinion

    Vigiolto v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1986)

    …Applicable Law. We begin with the proposition that in a tort action, as a general rule, proof that a [\1457] specific defendant caused the plaintiff's harm is a prerequisite to that defendant's liability to…

16. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri · May 21, 2019 · in the opinion

    Zurich American v. Insurance Co. of North America (2019)

    …indistinctness, or uncertainty in the meaning of the language in the policy. Language is ambiguous if it is reasonably open to different interpretations." Seeck v. Geico General Ins. Co., 212 S.W.3d 129, 132 (Mo…