25 results for “General Electric”, page 1 of 2
-
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…
-
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…
-
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…
-
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…
-
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…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · May 3, 2013
Ambruso v. Goulds Pumps (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2013)
…D. Roosevelt electrical engineer 1950s-1980s; shipfitter and seaman in the United States Navy Brooklyn Navy Yard Brooklyn 1940s; shipfitter and seaman in the United States Navy USS Chicago 1940s; insulator 1950s-1990s; general laborer, bus…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · February 24, 2000 · in the opinion
Vasura v. Acands (2000)
…448, 451 (9th Cir.1994). Others have held that the relevant time period for ascertaining foreign state status is that in which the conduct at issue took place. See General Electric Capital Corp. v. Grossman, 991…
-
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.)…
-
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…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · January 7, 1998 · in the opinion
ACandS v. Abate (1998)
The Western Electric plant was comprised of several buildings and was approximately three miles long and one-and-one-quarter miles deep. Morrow indicated that he worked primarily in the wire insulation building until he became…
-
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…
-
Court case · Georgia Court of Appeals · March 14, 2001
Hoffman v. AC&S, Inc. (2001)
…site at some unspecified time during the 1960s is insufficient. An expert's general opinion that workers were exposed to asbestos products does not supply the missing link to a particular defendant. Product Identification; Expert Testimony…
-
Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · March 17, 1999
Novicki v. Rapid-American Corp. (1999)
…and Rapid-American conceded it did not. The case therefore fell under section 5, the general product liability limitation and repose provision. Because the parties had not briefed section 5, the court remanded for further argument…
-
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…
-
Court case · Texas Supreme Court · November 30, 2000 · in the opinion
Pustejovsky v. Rapid-American Corp. (2000)
…American argues that Pustejovsky's lack of knowledge of the scope of his damages from his exposure to asbestos does not affect the accrual of his cause of action. Following these general rules, Rapid American contends…
-
Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · November 6, 2001 · in the opinion
Allied Signal, Inc. v. Herring (2001)
…[\1036] Moreover, section 2 was enacted to extend the general limitations period in express recognition of the long latency period associated with asbestos-related diseases and illnesses. Extending the limitations period only for the very few…