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

Search

6 results for “Owens-Corning Fiberglas”

  1. Court case · Wisconsin Supreme Court · October 27, 1999

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

    The Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed the circuit court's order dismissing the Sophas' mesothelioma action against Owens-Corning and the other defendants as time-barred, and remanded for further proceedings. A diagnosis of a non-malignant…

  2. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 13, 1996

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

    The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's orders staying the Hansens' California asbestos actions against Owens-Corning Fiberglas and others on forum non conveniens grounds, so the plaintiffs lost and were directed to file…

  3. Court case · South Carolina Court of Appeals · June 11, 2001

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

    Janet Murphy, a Virginia resident, and her husband David sued Du Pont, Rapid American and other companies in South Carolina. She alleged she developed mesothelioma from asbestos fibers carried home on her father's clothing. Her father, Dr. Charles…

  4. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · February 20, 1998

    Ruckstuhl v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)

    Evelyn Ruckstuhl and her husband Richard sued several companies in Louisiana state court. They alleged she was diagnosed with mesothelioma in March 1996 from asbestos exposure in two ways: dust on her husband's work clothes from the Baton Rouge…

  5. Court case · Iowa Supreme Court · September 17, 1997 · in the opinion

    Huber v. Watson (1997)

    …that a manufacturer may have supplied the asbestos to which a defendant was exposed is insufficient. See, e.g., Perrin v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 871 F.Supp. 1092, 1094 (N.D.Iowa 1994), aff'd…

  6. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · September 4, 1997

    In re Celotex Corp. (1997)

    …the district court's denial of Owens-Illinois's motion to remand and its dismissal of the contribution action against Rapid American for lack of personal jurisdiction, so Rapid won and Owens-Illinois lost. A contribution…