14 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · April 3, 2014
Whalen v. General Electric Corporation (2014)
The court denied General Dynamics' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' strict products liability claim and denied its motion to strike the punitive damages prayer as moot, so the Whalens' claims proceeded. Under maritime law, a complaint…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Central District of California · August 1, 2016 · in the opinion
Lund v. 3M Company (2016)
…district court case, Defendants argued that a Navy ship should not be considered a "product" for purposes of a strict liability claim. (Id. (citing Mack v. General Electric Co., 896 F. Supp. 2d 333, 345 (E…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · April 5, 2024 · in the opinion
Speck v. CBS Corporation (2024)
…Speck was to any work done on or around a General Electric product or product of another defendant\[,\]" and has "no idea" about the quantity of asbestos fibers to which Speck may have been exposed by…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 8, 2014 · in the opinion
Gottschall v. Crane Co. (2014)
…Johnson court's explicit approval of the reasoning of the federal court in In re Related Asbestos Cases. \[Johnson, supra,\] 43 Cal.4th at 69-70." (Gottschall v. General Electric (E.D.Pa., Dec. 9, 2011…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · January 13, 2021
Gilstrap v. CBS Corporation (2021)
…Robert E. Lee 1959-1964; trainee/trainer Nuclear Power School Idaho Falls 1964-1967; master chief, engine room supervisor / Chief of the Boat General Dynamics/Electric Boat shipyard (USS Omaha and USS Indianapolis) Groton 1975-1980
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · December 21, 2016
Brinkman v. General Dynamics Corporation (2016)
…defense is available in failure-to-warn cases; this favored General Dynamics and Electric Boat over the Brinkmans. The government contractor defense is available in failure-to-warn cases, so a district court may not remand…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Central District of California · June 18, 2020 · in the opinion
Kruse v. Actuant Corporation (2020)
… 3.) After his military service, Mr. Jimenez was "honorably discharged as the civilian equivalent of a Certified Aircraft Electrical Mechanic and Technician." (Id.) Apart from his service, Mr. Jimenez also "performed both supervisorial and hands-on…
-
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 · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · February 8, 2021
Carnes v. General Dynamics Corp. (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2021)
The magistrate judge recommended granting General Dynamics' motion for summary judgment against the Carnes plaintiffs because they produced no evidence that Mr. Carnes was exposed to an asbestos-containing product attributable to General Dynamics. Under Texas…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas · March 31, 2021
LaFRENTZ v. Lockheed Martin Corporation (2021)
The court denied 3M and General Dynamics' request for an adverse inference jury instruction for spoliation, but granted a lesser remedy: a limited jury instruction describing the unanswered preservation request and the burial of the lung…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · February 26, 2016
Boyd v. Boeing Company (2016)
The court denied Lockheed Martin's and General Dynamics' motions to reconsider the order allowing plaintiffs to add them as defendants after the amendment deadline, and denied their motion to strike them from the amended complaint…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 30, 2021
Toy v. Armstrong Int'l (In re Asbestos, 2021)
…motion to exclude plaintiffs' expert Dr. Brody (he may give general but not specific causation testimony) and denied Warren Pumps' and Honeywell's motion to exclude "every exposure" testimony, without prejudice to renewed objections at trial…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 10, 2023 · in the opinion
Wilgenbusch v. Metalclad Insulation LLC (2023)
…has held that comparative fault principles apply when apportioning liability between a strictly liable party and a negligent party. (See e.g., Daly v. General Motors Corp. (1978) 20 Cal.3d 725, 736-737; Safeway Stores…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · July 20, 2018 · in the opinion
Clayton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2018)
…negligence, premises liability, conspiracy, and strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities. (SAC § V.) They seek general and special damages for pain, suffering, "loss of spousal relationship," disability, medical expenses, and economic loss. (Id.) Saberhagen moves for…