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

Search

41 results for “General Electric”, page 1 of 3

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Iowa · July 16, 1998

    Harder v. ACandS, Inc. (1998)

    The federal district court denied General Electric's motion for summary judgment, holding that Iowa's fifteen-year statute of repose did not bar the Harders' claims against GE over asbestos insulation blankets. Under Iowa Code…

  2. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · March 2, 2016

    Myers v. Crouse-Hinds Division OF Cooper Industries, Inc. (2016)

    The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed the denial of summary judgment to General Electric and Owens-Illinois in the Geyman case and reversed summary judgment for Crouse-Hinds and the other defendants in the Myers case, so…

  3. Court case · New York Supreme Court · September 8, 2010

    Horn v. A.W. Chesterson Co. (In re Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig., 2010)

    Ten asbestos cases, brought by plaintiffs represented by the same law firm, were assigned to one New York County judge for trial. Eight of the plaintiffs, alleging mesothelioma, asked the court to consolidate their cases into three groups for joint…

  4. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · April 3, 1997 · in the opinion

    Anchor Packing Co. v. Grimshaw (1997)

    …3\] (Emphasis added). In addition, the legislative history of C.J. § 11-108 indicates that the General Assembly intended that the cap apply broadly, as opposed to only malpractice claims. In January 1986, Senate Bill No…

  5. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit · January 31, 1990

    Kraciun v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1990)

    …Nemours & Co. plant, Clinton, Iowa Clinton 1953 onward (except Navy 1954-1958); service crew, general maintenance worker and electrical maintenance worker E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. plant, Clinton, Iowa Clinton 1948-1985; maintenance person…

  6. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · December 28, 2000 · in the opinion

    Hollingsworth v. Connor (2000)

    …appropriate. Appellants assert that a determination as to whether there was insufficient knowledge of the manufacturer or of the scientific field in general would have been relevant in order to determine whether the Kent cigarettes, and…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York · May 1, 2000 · in the opinion

    Falise v. American Tobacco Co. (2000)

    …from asbestos workers who were likely to be fatally affected by the combined inhalation of the two. A. Asbestos Uses and Production Asbestos is a general term referring to two main varieties of natural, fibrous minerals…

  8. Court case · Illinois Supreme Court · October 25, 1983 · in the opinion

    Froud v. Celotex Corp. (1983)

    …2d 199, 214-15, 90 S.Ct. 1583, 1595-96 (Black, J., dissenting); General Dynamics Corp., Electric Boat Division, v. Benefits Review Board (2d Cir.1977), 565 F.2d 208, 212; Williams v. Ray (1978), 146…

  9. Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 30, 1996 · in the opinion

    Armstrong World Industries v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. (1996)

    …were not dangerous. There was concern about the dustiness of Armaspray — but not so much for health reasons as for reasons of cleanup and potential damage to electrical equipment. The specifications for Armaspray called for good…

  10. Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · April 19, 1982 · in the opinion

    Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1982)

    …Rather, defendants state, the cost "will be borne by the public at large and reflected in a general, across the board increase in premiums to compensate for unanticipated risks." There is some truth in this assertion…

  11. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit · November 29, 1993

    Angelo v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (1993)

    …It upheld exclusion of a treating doctor's deposition because the Angelos had not shown diligent efforts to secure his attendance. It found the reverse bifurcation proper, and the jury instructions and general verdict form adequate.

  12. 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…

  13. Court case · U.S. District Court, Central District of California · June 14, 2012 · in the opinion

    Couscouris v. Hatch Grinding Wheels, Inc. (2012)

    …2012. United States District Court, C.D. California. CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL GEORGE H. KING, District Judge. Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order re: Motion for Remand and for Award of Costs Incurred This matter is before us on…

  14. Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · February 14, 2014 · in the opinion

    McGuire v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014)

    …been a strictly personal choice, yet it was a thing of comfort and convenience to himself while he was serving as maintenance man and general custodian and while he was on call at all hours. Therefore…

  15. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · April 14, 1995 · in the opinion

    Kirk v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1995)

    …the petit jury venire. The Supreme Court announced a general rule that "\[t\]he denial or impairment of the right \[to exercise peremptory challenges\] is reversible error without a showing of prejudice." Swain, 380 U.S…

  16. Court case · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · July 7, 1993 · in the opinion

    Behrendt v. GAF Corp. (1993)

    …fishing, woodworking. Mr. Behrendt's pain symptoms eventually led to a diagnosis of mesothelioma in December 1990. He was taken to the Emergency Room at Community General Osteopathic Hospital, Harrisburg, on December 23, 1990 with a…

  17. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · July 1, 1993 · in the opinion

    Watkins v. Fibreboard Corp. (1993)

    …asbestos was the producing cause. This is a basic issue in this case, articulated to some extent in the trial judge's general instructions, but not clearly articulated by either party, except perhaps by the plaintiffs…

  18. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · January 25, 1991 · in the opinion

    Moran v. G. & WH Corson, Inc. (1991)

    …with Bob Hinks. Q. About that knowledge? A. A general discussion, a light general thing that I had read about in the paper or, you know, not actually getting into detail. Q. You read about what…

  19. Court case · Florida District Court of Appeal · February 5, 1985 · in the opinion

    Meehan v. Celotex Corp. (1985)

    …of the negligent act. Indeed, as Gaboury itself says: "In determining the proper forum in which to bring suit under the general statute fixing venue where the cause of action \arose', or \accrued', the \injury occurred…

  20. 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…