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

Search

27 results for “Owens-Illinois”, page 1 of 2

  1. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · December 22, 1989

    Sholtis v. American Cyanamid Co. (1989)

    Two long-time employees of the American Cyanamid plant, Robert Sholtis and Sam Lee, sued asbestos manufacturers and suppliers. Sholtis died at 65 of pleural asbestosis. He had worked as a mill operator, maintenance laborer, pipefitter's helper and…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Central District of Illinois · February 25, 2020

    Hicks v. Ford Motor Company (2020)

    …may be treated as fraudulently joined when procedural rules (waiver, and Illinois limits on reconsideration with late evidence) leave no reasonable possibility of reinstating the claim; the common-defense exception does not apply where the reason…

  3. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · June 23, 1994

    Busfield v. AC & S., Inc. (1994)

    Alva Busfield and his wife sued many asbestos companies. A jury found that Busfield had an asbestos-related disease, asymptomatic asbestosis or pleural thickening, but that it caused him no harm. The opinion does not describe where or how he was…

  4. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 26, 2003 · in the opinion

    Taylor v. John Crane, Inc. (2003)

    Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 14 Cal.4th 985, 60 Cal.Rptr.2d 103, 928 P.2d 1181 (Richards) that controls here. In Richards, the Supreme Court had occasion to consider the interplay between Proposition 51 and…

  5. Court case · California Court of Appeal · June 18, 2015 · in the opinion

    Sherman v. Hennessy Industries, Inc. (2015)

    …and a reasonable medical probability that a particular exposure or series of exposures was a substantial factor in bringing about the risk of the alleged injuries. (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953…

  6. Court case · California Court of Appeal · June 11, 2007 · in the opinion

    Cadlo v. Metalclad Insulation Corporation (2007)

    …a preponderance of the evidence that in reasonable medical probability, this exposure was a substantial factor contributing to \[Cadlo's\] risk of developing the disease." "Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953 (Rutherford…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · April 18, 2019 · in the opinion

    Rodrigue v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (2019)

    …for summary judgment, plaintiffs have either moved to dismiss or settled with the following defendants which were party to the Joint Defendants' motion: FMC Corporation,\[20\] Ingersoll-Rand Company,\[21\] McCarty Corporation,\[22\] Owens-Illinois, Inc.…

  8. Court case · California Court of Appeal · June 18, 2015 · in the opinion

    Greenberg v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (2015)

    …and a reasonable medical probability that a particular exposure or series of exposures was a substantial factor in bringing about the risk of the alleged injuries. (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953…

  9. Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 16, 2008 · in the opinion

    Clemmer v. John Crane, Inc. (2008)

    …new 2003). We have reviewed the instructions given to the jury and conclude that there was no error. Our Supreme Court addressed the issue of causation in asbestos cases in Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997…

  10. Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 24, 2013 · in the opinion

    Keeney v. AW Chesterton Company (2013)

    …190 Cal.App.4th at p. 33.) Appellants rely on Sparks v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 461 (Sparks) and Stewart to argue that John Crane did not bear its burden of providing…

  11. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 4, 2019 · in the opinion

    Linsowe v. Hennessy Indus. (In re Laosd Asbestos Cases, 2019)

    …To be considered a proximate cause of an injury, the acts of the defendant must have been a \substantial factor' in contributing to the injury. (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953, 969…

  12. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of California · August 1, 2014 · in the opinion

    Willis v. Buffalo Pumps Inc. (2014)

    …285). A. Threshold Exposure Plaintiff's claims require proof that Defendant caused or contributed to Donald Willis's exposure to asbestos. Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal.4th 953, 975 (1997) ("\[P\]laintiffs \[bear\] the…

  13. Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 4, 2012 · in the opinion

    Bettencourt v. Hennessy Industries, Inc. (2012)

    …context of products liability actions, the plaintiff must prove that the defective products supplied by the defendant were a substantial factor in bringing about his or her injury." (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Colorado · March 19, 2019 · in the opinion

    Mestas v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2019)

    …A trial is the appropriate means to determine what obligations, if any, each Defendant owes to Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs have not shown that they cannot obtain complete relief from any Defendant without the absent parties. Second…

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

    Charlevoix v. Caterpillar, Inc. (2017)

    821 Moreover, the plaintiff must show "the manufacturer's asbestos product was used at the specific site within the workplace where \[the plaintiff\] worked." Roberts v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 726 F.Supp. 172, 174 (W…

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

    Charlevoix v. John Crane (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2017)

    …in the scope of \[the plaintiffs\] entire work history," should be considered in determining whether defendant's conduct was a substantial contributing factor. Allen v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 571 N.W.2d 530, 533 (Mich…

  17. Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 9, 2016 · in the opinion

    Rondon v. Hennessy Industries, Inc. (2016)

    …is imposed for three types of product defects: manufacturing defects, design defects, and warning defects. (Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 987, 995 \[281 Cal.Rptr. 528, 810 P.2d 549\] (Anderson).…

  18. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 8, 2010 · in the opinion

    Reaser v. AW Chesterton Company (2010)

    …the forum non conveniens motion can be granted. In that regard, Hansen v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 753 (Hansen) is instructive. Hansen was an asbestos case with 200 named defendants. (Id…

  19. Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 22, 2012 · in the opinion

    Barker v. Hennessy Industries, Inc. (2012)

    …defects: Manufacturing defects, design defects, and "\warning defects,' i.e., inadequate warnings or failures to warn."\[4\] (Anderson v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 987, 995 \[281 Cal.Rptr. 528, 810 P.2d…

  20. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · July 31, 2002 · in the opinion

    In re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. (2002)

    … 1447(d) (emphasis added). We construed that language [\388] in Feidt v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp., 153 F.3d 124 (3d Cir.1998), where we held that "section 1447(d) prohibits review of remand orders \whether…