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

Search

18 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · June 30, 2014

    Barnes v. Foster Wheeler Corp. (2014)

    The district court granted General Electric's motion for summary judgment and dismissed all claims against GE with prejudice, because plaintiffs offered no admissible evidence that Barnes was exposed to an asbestos product made or supplied…

  2. Court case · New York Supreme Court · January 25, 2010

    Miranda v. Abex Corp. (2010)

    Four plaintiffs, Ernesto Miranda, Antonio DiBenedetto, Lutz Sommer and Gordon Cheney, sued Abex Corporation and other companies in New York County. They alleged they had mesothelioma from asbestos exposure, and two of the four had died. Miranda and…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · September 30, 2015

    Hedden v. CBS Corporation (2015)

    The court granted summary judgment to Crown Cork & Seal, CBS, General Electric, Gardner Denver, Link-Belt and Riley Power, and denied it to Crane Co. and John Crane, Inc. on the maritime claims, so the Heddens…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Wyoming · April 7, 2014 · in the opinion

    Johnson v. Allis-Chalmers Corporation Product Liability Trust (2014)

    "Under general conflict of laws principles, where the laws of the two jurisdictions would produce the same result on the particular issue presented, there is a \false conflict,' and the \[c\]ourt should avoid the choice…

  5. Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · June 27, 2017

    McCarthy v. Warren Pumps (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2017)

    The Superior Court denied the motions for summary judgment of Warren Pumps, Gardner Denver and General Electric, ruling that the decedent's pre-suit sworn statement was admissible and that plaintiff showed enough product identification to…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · April 26, 2021

    Gay v. AO Smith Corporation (2021)

    Carl Gay developed mesothelioma, diagnosed in June 2019, and died in April 2020. His daughter, Allisa Gay, as executor of his estate, sued Gardner Denver and other manufacturers and distributors. She alleged he was exposed to asbestos in Gardner…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Wyoming · April 7, 2014

    Johnson v. Allis-Chalmers Corp. Prod. Liab. Trust (2014)

    The district court granted summary judgment to Gardner Denver, Bechtel, FMC, CBS (Westinghouse's successor) and General Electric, ruling against the estate of H. Paul Johnson, because no evidence tied any of their asbestos to him…

  8. Court case · Mississippi Supreme Court · October 14, 2010

    Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC v. Pittman (2010)

    Lonnie Pittman was named as a plaintiff in a December 2002 asbestos suit against many companies. Defendants later learned he had died in March 2001, almost two years before the suit was filed. His widow, Mary Pittman, was substituted as plaintiff…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · November 9, 2021

    Data v. AO Smith Corporation (2021)

    Darlene Data sued many companies in her own right and as executrix of her husband Michael Data's estate. Mr. Data served in the Navy aboard the USS Newport News from 1969 to 1973. He later worked at Mesta Machine and then at the West Pittsburgh…

  10. Court case · California Court of Appeal · August 25, 2009 · in the opinion

    Campbell v. American Standard, Inc. (2009)

    …difficult if not impossible, is irrelevant to the determination whether the forum is suitable unless \the alternative forum provides no remedy at all.' \[Citations.\]" (Guimei v. General Electric Co. (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 689, 696.)…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · June 24, 2024 · in the opinion

    Marcus v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2024)

    …causation standard, and then arguing that the second "substantial factor" prong is not met). Only in its reply does Eaton raise doubts about Plaintiff's actual bystander exposure to its asbestos-containing electrical products. Dkt. No…

  12. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · February 13, 2019

    Johansen v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2019)

    …law, a plaintiff must show exposure to each defendant's product and that the product was a substantial factor in causing the injury. A general recollection of a manufacturer's name, with no detail on where…

  13. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · July 18, 2007 · in the opinion

    Bugosh v. Allen Refractories Company (2007)

    …applicable. ¶ 28 The doctrine of judicial estoppel holds that "\[a\]s a general rule, a party to an action is estopped from assuming a position inconsistent with his or her assertion in a previous action, if…

  14. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · June 27, 1996 · in the opinion

    Georgine v. Amchem Products, Inc. (1996)

    …requirements of predominance and superiority. In In re General Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Products Liability Litigation, 55 F.3d 768 (3d Cir.) \[Hereinafter GM Trucks\], cert. denied sub nom. General Motors Corp. v…

  15. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · March 15, 2007 · in the opinion

    Bugosh v. Allen Refractories Co. (2007)

    …approach a situation to which the term judicial estoppel is applicable. ¶ 28 The doctrine of judicial estoppel holds that "\[a\]s a general rule, a party to an action is estopped from assuming a position inconsistent…

  16. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · March 8, 2017 · in the opinion

    Evans v. Flowserve US Inc. (2017)

    …must "assess the general features of the type of incident involved," to determine whether the incident has "a potentially disruptive impact on maritime commerce\[.\]" Second, a court must determine whether "the general character" of the "activity…

  17. Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 2, 2009 · in the opinion

    Wangen v. Gardner Denver, Inc. (2009)

    …d\] that Soco West, Inc. is not subject to jurisdiction in the State of Washington." Plant Insulation Company presented a declaration from its general counsel. Based upon his personal knowledge, he averred that the company was…

  18. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania · October 13, 2022 · in the opinion

    Gorton v. Gardner Denver, Inc. (2022)

    …... the courts have held that the pleader must establish jurisdiction with evidence from other sources, such as affidavits or depositions.... The general rule, therefore, is that a pleading's allegations of subject matter jurisdiction are taken…