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

Search

8 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · March 17, 2022 · in the opinion

    Savoie v. Huntington Ingalls (2022)

    …24, 2014). In Vedros, the plaintiff filed suit against multiple defendants in state court, and three defendants, General Electric, Foster-Wheeler, and Westinghouse, subsequently removed the case pursuant to the federal officer removal statute. Id. at…

  2. Court case · Connecticut Appellate Court · March 7, 2017 · in the opinion

    RT Vanderbilt Company, Inc. v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company (2017)

    …in other jurisdictions, that a pollution exclusion clause in a comprehensive general liability policy bars coverage only for traditional environmental pollution such as oil spills or the dumping of hazardous waste into the natural environment. Id.…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut · July 16, 2002 · in the opinion

    Yale University v. Cigna Ins. Co. (2002)

    …In that case, the court concluded that repair and replacement costs incurred by the insured on account of damage to electrical transformers caused by a design defect were not "ensuing losses." Id. In support of its…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · November 18, 2014 · in the opinion

    Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Company (2014)

    MICHAEL COMARDELLE, v. PENNSYLVANIA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL., Section I. Civil Action No. 13-6555. November 18, 2014. United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana. ORDER AND REASONS LANCE M. AFRICK, District Judge. Before the…

  5. Court case · Connecticut Supreme Court · March 28, 2019 · in the opinion

    RT Vanderbilt Company, Inc. v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company (2019)

    …and accidental" exception to pollution exclusion was intended to preclude coverage for gradually occurring pollution, "so that only a temporally abrupt release of pollutants would be covered as an exception to the general pollution exclusion"). Indeed…

  6. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · December 28, 1988 · in the opinion

    Lac D'Amiante du Quebec v. American Home Assur. (1988)

    …$11.2 million in expenses (including legal fees). \[2\] LAQ did not sue Canadian General because LAQ had permitted it to purchase back its policies for the years 1962 through 1976 for approximately $1.7 million…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · July 31, 1985 · in the opinion

    Lac D'Amiante Du Quebec v. Am. Home Assur. Co. (1985)

    …While all have held for the insureds, most commonly in declaratory judgment actions seeking to clarify the parties' rights and obligations under Comprehensive General Liability (CGL) policies, the courts have offered conflicting interpretations of the manner…

  8. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · December 5, 2000 · in the opinion

    Brunet v. Avondale Industries, Inc. (2000)

    …should be held strictly liable for the injuries that Brunet sustained. The trial court did not err in awarding Brunet $250,000 in general damages. I do not believe that the award is beyond that which…