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

Search

10 results for “Reaction Department”

  1. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · June 8, 1982 · in the opinion

    White v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)

    …June 1948 until June 1980). During those years he worked in various departments of Johns-Manville including the transite pipe plant where he was exposed to asbestos fibers and silica, the asbestos shingle plant where he…

  2. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · December 29, 1988 · in the opinion

    Pecorino v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1988)

    …pleaded that the Defendants' breach of these various duties (as well as the fact that these products precipitated great harm which was not a consequence of any unique or unforeseeable reaction of the user) caused Mr…

  3. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · March 5, 1986 · in the opinion

    Herber v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1986)

    …concern. However, based upon the reaction of the Supreme Court of New Jersey when confronted with similar arguments, we do not believe that this concern would deter that Court from embracing the view here expressed. See…

  4. Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · July 31, 1986 · in the opinion

    Fischer v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1986)

    …notion that certain activities that create danger must, regardless of their reasonableness, "pay \[their\] own way in the event \[they\] actually cause\[\] damage\[\] to others." Berg v. Reaction Motors Div., 37 N.J. 396, 410 (1962)…

  5. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · July 20, 1992 · in the opinion

    Marinari v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd. (1992)

    …become imbedded in lung or other tissue. The reaction consists of the body "walling off" the foreign matter with fibrous cells such that it eventually produces scar-like tissue which builds up over many years. ..... Pulmonary…

  6. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · January 21, 1985 · in the opinion

    Jackson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1985)

    …and evokes the strongest of emotions. This prejudice must be coupled with the lack of effectiveness of any limiting instruction to eliminate the emotional reaction from the minds of the jury. Looking just at the first…

  7. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · September 22, 1987 · in the opinion

    In re Asbestos Litigation (1987)

    …J., dissenting). Whatever may have been the reaction of the courts in earlier times, we are persuaded that the district court properly considered the common law of New Jersey to be within the scope of the…

  8. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · September 3, 1982 · in the opinion

    Staiano v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1982)

    …24 Wayne L.Rev. 1641 (1978) (British reaction to first breath rule announced in Cartledge). Other jurisdictions have viewed subjecting the plaintiff to exposure as a continuing tort and have adopted what may be called the…

  9. Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · April 10, 1992 · in the opinion

    Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Balbos (1992)

    …305 (1990) (footnote omitted) (Doctrinal Collapse). Here, where the relevant inquiry concerns the reactions of persons now deceased to hypothetical warnings, the proof of causation becomes more difficult or, depending on one's point of view…

  10. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · June 3, 1985 · in the opinion

    Gideon v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1985)

    …cumulative. Because inhaled fibers are not all exhaled, but some remain in the lungs and cause reactions there, the later inhalation of added amounts will cause injury that might not have occurred had exposure ceased. There…