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

Search

9 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · April 5, 2024 · in the opinion

    Speck v. CBS Corporation (2024)

    …Speck was to any work done on or around a General Electric product or product of another defendant\[,\]" and has "no idea" about the quantity of asbestos fibers to which Speck may have been exposed by…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 26, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)

    …of America, Inc. (Rec. Doc. 739), Foster-Wheeler LLC (Rec. Docs. 693, 726, 730), General Electric Company (Rec. Docs. 702, 705), and ViacomCBS Inc. (Rec. Docs. 727, 729), plaintiffs' respective oppositions to each motion (Rec. Docs…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · June 24, 2024 · in the opinion

    Marcus v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2024)

    …causation standard, and then arguing that the second "substantial factor" prong is not met). Only in its reply does Eaton raise doubts about Plaintiff's actual bystander exposure to its asbestos-containing electrical products. Dkt. No…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 30, 2021

    Toy v. Armstrong Int'l (In re Asbestos, 2021)

    …motion to exclude plaintiffs' expert Dr. Brody (he may give general but not specific causation testimony) and denied Warren Pumps' and Honeywell's motion to exclude "every exposure" testimony, without prejudice to renewed objections at trial…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · September 27, 2021 · in the opinion

    Walls v. Ford Motor Company (2021)

    …as already mentioned, Rule 26 provides two exceptions to the general rule that a party may not obtain discovery from another party's consulting expert: "(i) as provided in Rule 35(b); or (ii) on showing…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · February 25, 2022 · in the opinion

    Walls v. Ford Motor Company (2022)

    …in 1974 by prohibiting the use of compressed air for cleaning purposes except when reduced to a slow speed and paired with personal protective equipment. Hand and Portable Powered Tools and Equipment, General, 39 Fed. Reg…

  7. Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 10, 2023 · in the opinion

    Wilgenbusch v. Metalclad Insulation LLC (2023)

    …has held that comparative fault principles apply when apportioning liability between a strictly liable party and a negligent party. (See e.g., Daly v. General Motors Corp. (1978) 20 Cal.3d 725, 736-737; Safeway Stores…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 25, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)

    …judgment is disfavored when issues of intent or state of mind are involved, plaintiffs fail to consider that this is a general rule. The rule does not preclude this Court from evaluating the merits of such…

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

    Clayton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2018)

    …negligence, premises liability, conspiracy, and strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities. (SAC § V.) They seek general and special damages for pain, suffering, "loss of spousal relationship," disability, medical expenses, and economic loss. (Id.) Saberhagen moves for…