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

Search

22 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 2

  1. Court case · Florida District Court of Appeal · December 27, 2017 · in the opinion

    Bechtel Corporation v. Batchelor (2017)

    …in this case. The complaint sued twenty-six defendants including, for example, Banner Supply Company, Bennett Auto Supply, Ford Motor Company, Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation, General Electric Company, Genuine Parts Company, Gould Pumps, Inc., Honeywell International…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Alabama · September 13, 2012 · in the opinion

    Brown v. the Boeing Company (2012)

    …Scientific Corp., 252 F.3d 1253, 1255 (11th Cir. 2001) (quoting McCants v. Ford Motor Co., 781 F.2d 855, 856-57 (11th Cir. 1986) (emphasis in McCants). The critical question is whether dismissal would cause…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 30, 2021 · in the opinion

    Pizarro v. National Steel and Shipbuilding Company (2021)

    …formulated. These inferences cannot be based merely on speculation, but they may be established by circumstantial evidence, in accordance with ordinary standards of proof. Romo v. Ford Motor Co., 99 Cal.App. 4th 1115, 1141 (2002)…

  4. Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 25, 2009 · in the opinion

    Taylor v. Elliott Turbomachinery Co. Inc. (2009)

    …2001) 26 Cal.4th 465, 478-479 \[110 Cal.Rptr.2d 370, 28 P.3d 116\], quoting Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co. (1964) 61 Cal.2d 256, 261 \[37 Cal.Rptr. 896, 391 P.2d 168…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · November 7, 2014 · in the opinion

    Logan v. Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. (2014)

    …cases applying a "modified or adjusted" Lohrmann test in mesothelioma cases and rejecting them as inconsistent with a prediction that the North Carolina Supreme Court would adopt the Lohrmann test); see also Ford Motor Co. v…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · October 6, 2016 · in the opinion

    Bell v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corp. (2016)

    The rules of evidence do not permit an expert to testify that "\[j\]ust because we cannot rule anything out" that "we can rule everything in." Smith v. Ford Motor Co., No. 08-630, 2013 WL…

  7. Court case · Washington Supreme Court · December 11, 2008 · in the opinion

    Braaten v. Saberhagen Holdings (2008)

    …in Simonetta, common law product liability claims like those here\[4\] are governed by the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A (1965),\[5\] adopted in Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wash.2d 522, 531-32, 452…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · March 6, 2017 · in the opinion

    Bell v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corp. (2017)

    …to say, in the realm of asbestos exposure, the percentages alone simply do not bear out specific causation testimony one way or the other. See Yates v. Ford Motor Co., 113 F. Supp. 3d 841, 847…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · March 6, 2017 · in the opinion

    Bell v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corp. (2017)

    …plaintiff's exposure. See Rost v. Ford Motor Co., 2016 WL 6876490, at [\8] (Pa. Nov. 22, 2016) (permitting expert opinion that "Rost's exposures to asbestos at Smith Motors were sufficiently frequent, regular, and proximate…

  10. Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · June 26, 2016 · in the opinion

    Rublee v. Carrier Corp. (2016)

    …466, 472, 804 P.2d 659 (1991); RCW 4.22.920. \[22\] Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wash.2d 522, 452 P.2d 729 (1969) (applying § 402A strict product liability to manufacturers); Seattle-First Nat…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · January 25, 2012 · in the opinion

    Rabovsky v. Goulds Pumps (In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (NO. VI), 2012)

    …602 F.3d 152, 172 (3d Cir. April 7, 2010) (quoting Pineda v. Ford Motor Co., 502 F.3d 237, 243-44 (3d Cir. 2008)). As is the case with regard to the Federal Rules of…

  12. Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · December 18, 2015 · in the opinion

    May v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp. (2015)

    …strict liability analysis. Common sense tells us that the pumps were what Respondents sold to the Navy, and the gaskets and packing are included within that product. We have studied Ford Motor Co. v. Wood and…

  13. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · November 7, 2014 · in the opinion

    Logan v. Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. (2014)

    …collecting and rejecting cases applying a "modified or adjusted" Lohrmann test in mesothelioma cases as inconsistent with a prediction that the North Carolina Supreme Court would adopt the Lohrmann test); see also Ford Motor Co. v…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · July 29, 2011

    Corley v. Bill Vann Co. (In re Liability Litigation, 2011)

    The executor of Charles Corley's estate sued a group of companies in Alabama state court under the Alabama Wrongful Death Act. Mr. Corley had died of mesothelioma in October 2009. The case was removed to…

  15. Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 13, 2016 · in the opinion

    Moran v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation (2016)

    …and certain court of appeal decisions rendered in its wake: Chavez, supra, 207 Cal.App.4th 1283, Scott v. Ford Motor Co. (2014) 224 Cal.App.4th 1492 (Scott), Collin, supra, 228 Cal.App.4th 582…

  16. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · October 3, 2014

    May v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2014)

    …and sold by others. The circuit court granted the pump makers summary judgment. The Court of Special Appeals affirmed. It held that under its earlier decision in Ford Motor Co. v. Wood, and following courts in…

  17. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of California · July 21, 2014 · in the opinion

    Willis v. Buffalo Pumps Inc. (2014)

    Ford Motor Co., 99 Cal.App.4th 1115, 1141, 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 139 (2002) ("It is difficult to imagine how corporate malice could be shown in the case of a large corporation except by piecing…

  18. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · July 19, 2019 · in the opinion

    Evans v. Imo Industries, Inc. (2019)

    …by Captain Moore in forming his opinion regarding Navy warning requirements do not have the requisite "fit" to assist the trier of fact. See Oddi v. Ford Motor Co., 234 F.3d 136, 145 (3d Cir…

  19. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · August 30, 2017 · in the opinion

    Evans v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corp. (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2017)

    …Corporation, Defendant, represented by Beth E. Valocchi, Swartz Campbell LLC. General Electric Company, Defendant, represented by Beth E. Valocchi, Swartz Campbell LLC. IMO Industries, Inc., Defendant, represented by Eileen M. Ford, Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien…

  20. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · August 30, 2017 · in the opinion

    Evans v. John Crane (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2017)

    …Corporation, Defendant, represented by Beth E. Valocchi, Swartz Campbell LLC. General Electric Company, Defendant, represented by Beth E. Valocchi, Swartz Campbell LLC. IMO Industries, Inc., Defendant, represented by Eileen M. Ford, Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien…