12 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · Oregon Court of Appeals · February 8, 2012
Portland General Electric Company v. Ebasco Services, Inc. (2012)
…and vacated the supplemental fee judgment in favor of Portland General Electric. A court lacks jurisdiction to enter a default judgment for more than the amount prayed for in the complaint unless the defaulting party had…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia · April 2, 2018 · in the opinion
Hopeman Brothers, Inc. v. Continental Cas. Co. (2018)
…11) (emphasis in original). Hopeman then explains that, in light of Appalachian Insurance Co. v. General Electric Co., 8 N.Y.3d 162, 831 N.Y.S.2d 742, 863 N.E.2d 994, 999 (2007)…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 30, 1996 · in the opinion
Armstrong World Industries v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. (1996)
…were not dangerous. There was concern about the dustiness of Armaspray — but not so much for health reasons as for reasons of cleanup and potential damage to electrical equipment. The specifications for Armaspray called for good…
-
Court case · Delaware Supreme Court · September 12, 2016 · in the opinion
In re Viking Pump, Inc. (2016)
As a general principle, a clause restricting assignment does not in any way limit the policyholder's power to make an assignment of the rights under the policy — consisting of the right to receive the proceeds…
-
Court case · Delaware Court of Chancery · October 14, 2009 · in the opinion
Viking Pump, Inc. v. Century Indemnity Company (2009)
§ 35:7 (noting that the "the great majority of courts adhere to the rule that general stipulations in policies prohibiting assignments thereof except with the consent of the insurer apply only to assignments before loss, and…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · March 30, 2007 · in the opinion
AstenJohnson v. Columbia Cas. Co. (2007)
…to Commerce and Industry Insurance Company, Asten represented: "It has been our policy to apprise Asten-Hill \[Manufacturing Company\]'s general liability and excess liability carriers of all pending claims, enclosing a photocopy of each Complaint…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · March 5, 2013 · in the opinion
John Crane, Inc. v. Admiral Insurance Company (2013)
…UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYDS OF LONDON, and CERTAIN LONDON MARKET INSURANCE COMPANIES, including Excess Insurance Company, Ltd., General Reinsurance Corporation, River Thames Insurance Company, World Auxiliary Insurance Corporation, and John Does 1 through 400, Defendants, (Allianz Underwriters…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · June 4, 2013 · in the opinion
John Crane, Inc. v. Admiral Insurance Company (2013)
…UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYDS OF LONDON, and CERTAIN LONDON MARKET INSURANCE COMPANIES, Including Excess Insurance Company, Ltd., General Reinsurance Corporation, River Thames Insurance Company, World Auxiliary Insurance Corporation, and John Does 1 Through 400, Defendants (Allianz Underwriters…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · September 18, 2014 · in the opinion
Landry v. Columbia Casualty Company (2014)
…a voluntary act of Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs correctly argue that the general rule is that "other paper" does not render a case removable unless it is generated by the voluntary act of a plaintiff. Plaintiffs' argument fails…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · January 27, 1998 · in the opinion
In re Asbestos Litigation (1998)
…Amchem, \_\_\_ U.S. at \_\_\_, 117 S.Ct. at 2248. This general theme, expressed forcefully in Amchem, is reinforced by the Court's discussion of specific issues, most of which are highly relevant to the instant case…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Columbia · June 1, 1989 · in the opinion
Carey Canada Inc. v. California Union Ins. Co. (1989)
…Thus, the meaning of asbestosis was a matter of public record years before defendants' policies were sold. Numerous general circulation newspaper and magazine articles about the various asbestos-related health hazards, including articles in The New…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · May 1, 2012 · in the opinion
In re Federal-Mogul Global Inc. (2012)
…"The presumption is that the statute flows in orderly progression [\370] from general statement to specific instance so that ordinarily the qualification of a later clause upon an earlier one is to be expected." 1A Norman…