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

Search

27 results for “General Electric”, page 1 of 2

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · April 10, 2024 · in the opinion

    Legendre v. Louisiana Ins. Guaranty Association (2024)

    …a role in causing the deceased's asbestos exposure, including, but not limited to: Hopeman Brothers, Inc., International Paper Company, Paramount Global, General Electric Company, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Bayer Cropscience, Inc., Foster-Wheeler, LLC, Uniroyal, Inc.…

  2. Court case · Mississippi Supreme Court · December 12, 1990 · in the opinion

    Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Edwards (1990)

    … 15-1-35, citing the general rule that the statute began to run from the date of publication of the allegedly libelous statement to a third person. Staheli argued that the statute did not begin to…

  3. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · July 24, 1979 · in the opinion

    Nolan v. Johns-Manville Asbestos & Magnesia Materials Co. (1979)

    …defective product. See Urie v. Thompson, 337 U.S. 163, 69 S.Ct. 1018, 11 A.L.R.2d 252; Sylvania Electric Products, Inc. v. Barker, 228 F.2d 842; Brush Beryllium Co. v. Meckley, 284…

  4. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · April 17, 2002 · in the opinion

    Andaloro v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (2002)

    …Company, Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp., Owens Brockway Glass Container, Inc., Studebaker Worthington, Inc., Uniroyal, Inc., Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Inc., WR Grace & Co., Armstrong World Industries, Inc., Fibreboard Corp., GAF Corporation. Appeal of: John Crane, Inc., Appellant…

  5. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · March 30, 1999 · in the opinion

    Baker v. AC&S, Inc. (1999)

    …v. Gamble, 201 Pa. 289, 50 A. 971 (1902); Turton v. Powelton Electric Co., 185 Pa. 406, 39 A. 1053 (1898). Thus, "\[e\]ven if two parties were equally responsible for the plaintiff's injury, one…

  6. Court case · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · August 24, 1989 · in the opinion

    District of Columbia v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation (1989)

    …hospitals, and government offices, are for the general use of the public, and hundreds or even thousands of people pass through each of them every day. Any child who grows up in the District and attends…

  7. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · January 30, 1986 · in the opinion

    Lohrmann v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp. (1986)

    …a given industry. They are often set forth in some type of code, such as a building code or electrical code, or they may be adopted by the trade organization of a given industry. State of…

  8. Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York · March 15, 1989 · in the opinion

    In re Johns-Manville Corp. (1989)

    …Thus, pursuant to ¶ 10.1(B) of the Plan and the general power of this Court, the Court retains jurisdiction to determine the instant dispute. The Plan also provides in ¶ 10.1(G) that the Court…

  9. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · March 25, 2003

    Jurich v. Garlock, Inc. (2003)

    …applied. One statute covers asbestos claims against those who mined and sold asbestos. The other is the general ten-year statute of repose for product claims. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants. The…

  10. Court case · Pennsylvania Supreme Court · June 26, 2000 · in the opinion

    Baker v. ACandS (2000)

    He provided the following context: a party who signs a general release waiving all claims and discharging all parties will be precluded from thereafter suing a party who did not contribute consideration toward the release. However…

  11. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · February 28, 1986 · in the opinion

    Joyce v. AC and S., Inc. (1986)

    No ordinary disease of life to which the general public is exposed outside of the employment shall be compensable, except: (1) When it follows as an incident of occupational disease as defined in this title; or…

  12. Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · May 15, 1998 · in the opinion

    Porter Hayden v. Bullinger (1998)

    …verdict in favor of the hirer. The trial proceeded, resulting in judgments in favor of the plaintiff against the adverse driver and his general employer. On the plaintiff's appeal, the Court vacated the judgment in…

  13. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit · December 4, 1992 · in the opinion

    In re Joint E. & So. Dist. Asbestos Litigation (1992)

    …Plan-related documents. We therefore consider whether the changes were authorized by the more general reserved power of the Bankruptcy Court to modify the Plan "to the full extent permitted by the Code." Plan § 10.1…

  14. Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York · November 30, 1990 · in the opinion

    In re Joint Eastern & Southern Dist. Asbestos Lit. (1990)

    …Unliquidated Claims on File $4.794 billion Unpaid Settlements .434 billion 47,000 Future Claims 1.840 billion \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Total $7.068 billion\[3\] (1) The Trust, as movant, represented by its General Counsel, David T. Austern…

  15. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · January 14, 1980 · in the opinion

    Mooney v. Fibreboard Corp. (1980)

    …discretion to determine when it should be applied. The general rule should be that in cases where a plaintiff could easily have joined in the earlier action or where, either for the reasons discussed above or…

  16. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit · August 13, 1982 · in the opinion

    Neubauer v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1982)

    …to his health. We thus regard Wisconsin Natural Gas to be an exceptional application of the more general rule that the cause of action accrues when the asbestos-caused disease becomes diagnosable — e.g., provable by…

  17. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit · June 30, 1992 · in the opinion

    Feldman v. Owens-Illinois (In re Brooklyn Navy Yard Asbestos Litigation, 1992)

    …statute: "There is no justification for rewarding recalcitrant non-settling defendants by permitting them to apply the General Obligations Law offset in a manner that reduces or even obliterates their own liability in cases where plaintiffs…

  18. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · April 26, 1999 · in the opinion

    Holmes v. ACandS, Inc. (1999)

    …year discovery based statute of limitations applicable to product liability claims. The comprehensiveness of the medical malpractice act is evidence of the legislature's intent that it should prevail over the more general wrongful death statute…

  19. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · June 23, 1999 · in the opinion

    Lambert v. Babcock & Wilcox Co. (1999)

    …we must address two issues. First, we must assess the general features of the type of incident involved to determine whether the incident had "a potentially disruptive impact on maritime commerce." Id. (quoting Sisson v. Ruby…

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

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

    …TAMILIA, KELLY and JOHNSON, JJ. [\442] WIEAND, Judge: The general issue in this asbestos exposure action is whether Pennsylvania, in the context of asbestos actions, shall be a one-disease or two-disease state. More specifically…