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

Search

36 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 2

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · April 15, 2013

    Bobo v. Agco Corporation (2013)

    Barbara Bobo sued nine defendants, claiming she developed malignant mesothelioma from asbestos exposure. Seven were dismissed by stipulation, leaving MetLife and the Tennessee Valley Authority. She alleged that she was exposed through contact with…

  2. Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · July 22, 2019 · in the opinion

    Coffman v. Armstrong International, Inc. (2019)

    …J., dissenting). In some cases, it has proven difficult to apply. See, e.g., Stockton v. Ford Motor Company, No. W2016-01175-COA-R3-CV, 2017 WL 2021760, at [\12]-15 (Tenn. Ct. App., filed May…

  3. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · December 9, 2009 · in the opinion

    Bourque v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (2009)

    …Polk, Schell, etal., New Orleans, LA, for Defendants/Appellees, General Motors, Ford Motor Company. Court composed of JIMMIE C. PETERS, MARC T. AMY and MICHAEL G. SULLIVAN, Judges. AMY, Judge. Former employee and wife brought personal…

  4. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · December 28, 2017 · in the opinion

    Roverano v. John Crane, Inc. (2017)

    …cases, "Pennsylvania law requires that a plaintiff prove two elements: "that the product was defective, and that the defect was the substantial factor in causing the injury." Rost v. Ford Motor Company, 637 Pa. 625, 151…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · November 5, 1997 · in the opinion

    Ciletti v. Raymark Indus. (In re Asbestos Litigation, 1997)

    …and a reasonable person would conclude that the utility of the product did not outweigh the risk inherent in marketing a product designed in that manner." Denny v. Ford Motor Company, 87 N.Y.2d 248…

  6. Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · March 5, 2015

    Jones v. 84 Lumber Company (2015)

    …four areas of Tennessee law: modified comparative fault, a $750,000 cap on noneconomic damages, allocating fault to nonparties (including bankrupt companies), and the innocent retailer statute. The plaintiffs agreed Tennessee law applied but said it…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · September 21, 2015 · in the opinion

    Kochera v. General Electric Company (2015)

    …806 (7th Cir. 2013) (Daubert "remains the gold standard for evaluating the reliability of expert testimony."). The Seventh Circuit's Opinion in Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 215 F.3d 713 (7th Cir. 2000) provides the…

  8. Court case · Maryland Appellate Court · February 8, 2024 · in the opinion

    Basil-Flippen v. General Electric Company (2024)

    …it is merely incorporated into something larger, the strict liability will be found to carry through to the ultimate user or consumer," rather than to the assembler. Id. In Ford Motor Co. v. Wood, 119 Md…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · September 2, 2015 · in the opinion

    Bell v. Abb Group, Inc. (2015)

    …806 (7th Cir. 2013) (Daubert "remains the gold standard for evaluating the reliability of expert testimony."). The Seventh Circuit's Opinion in Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 215 F.3d 713 (7th Cir. 2000) provides the…

  10. Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · June 26, 2016 · in the opinion

    Rublee v. Carrier Corp. (2016)

    …466, 472, 804 P.2d 659 (1991); RCW 4.22.920. \[22\] Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co., 75 Wash.2d 522, 452 P.2d 729 (1969) (applying § 402A strict product liability to manufacturers); Seattle-First Nat…

  11. Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · March 6, 2009 · in the opinion

    Cardinal Industrial Insulation Co., Inc. v. Norris (2009)

    …jury instruction in every duty supported by the facts\[.\]" Id. We believe the trial court satisfied that entitlement with a liability instruction — its Instruction No. 1 — substantively indistinct from that in Ford Motor Co. v. Fulkerson…

  12. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · July 20, 2018 · in the opinion

    Clayton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2018)

    …b)(2); Heliotrope Gen., Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 189 F.3d 971, 981 n.18 (9th Cir. 1999). A Rule 12(c) motion challenges the sufficiency of the opposing party's pleadings, and the court…

  13. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri · March 15, 2019 · in the opinion

    Douglas v. Imerys Talc America, Inc. (2019)

    …be proper under § 1441(a) even if venue might have been improper in the state court prior to removal. Id.; see also Becker v. Ford Motor Co., No. 4:07CV1573 FRB, 2007 WL 4404168, at [\1…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri · September 11, 2017 · in the opinion

    MacCormack v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2017)

    …that under some circumstances even in the case of default, where a party actively participated in the litigation previously, collateral estoppel would apply); see also Ellis v. Ford Motor Co., 628 F. Supp. 849, 857 (D…

  15. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri · January 21, 2020 · in the opinion

    Douglas v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc. (2020)

    …No. 2:13-CV-04079, 2013 WL 12155465, at [\5] (W.D. Mo. June 18, 2013); Becker v. Ford Motor Co., No. 4:07CV1573 FRB, 2007 WL 4404168, at [\1] (E.D. Mo. Dec. 17, 2007…

  16. Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · June 11, 2002 · in the opinion

    Crane, Inc. v. Scribner (2002)

    …2d at 996. In adopting 1990 as the critical date when the cause of action arose, the court, though supposedly applying Grimshaw, essentially applied the manifestation test. In Ford Motor Co. v. Wood, 119 Md. App…

  17. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · December 19, 2019 · in the opinion

    Daniels v. ArvinMeritor, Inc. (2019)

    …App. 3d 26, 37, 342 Ill.Dec. 678, 932 N.E.2d 1139 (2010), and Jablonski v. Ford Motor Co., 398 Ill. App. 3d 222, 271, 337 Ill.Dec. 788, 923 N.E.2d 347 (2010…

  18. Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 18, 2000 · in the opinion

    Wilson v. John Crane, Inc. (2000)

    …society ascribes some fault to this conduct." (Id. at p. 1188, 272 Cal.Rptr. 304.) Quoting Montez v. Ford Motor Co. \[ (1980) \] 101 Cal.App.3d 315, 318-319, 161 Cal.Rptr. 578, the court continued…

  19. Court case · New York Supreme Court · December 18, 2015 · in the opinion

    Voelker v. John Crane (Matter of Eighth Jud. Dist. Asbestos Litig., 2015)

    …merit. Wherefore, it is hereby, ORDERED, that plaintiffs motion is granted and defendant's cross motion is denied. SO ORDERED. \[1\] Those entities were: Combustion Engineering; Ford Motor Co.; Foster-Wheeler Energy Co., LLC.; Garlock Sealing…

  20. Court case · Pennsylvania Supreme Court · February 19, 2020 · in the opinion

    Roverano v. John Crane, Inc. (2020)

    …actual, product-specific causation in many asbestos cases, the courts have come to accept abstract assessments of increased risk as proxies for traditional substantial-factor causation. See Rost v. Ford Motor Co., 637 Pa. 625, 668…