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

Search

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

  1. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · August 24, 1998 · in the opinion

    Feidt v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)

    …Foster Wheeler Corporation; Gaf Corporation, in itself and successor to Ruberoid Corporation; Garlock, Inc.; General Electric Corporation; Ingersoll-Rand Company; Lear Siegler Diversified Holdings Corporation; Pittsburgh Corning Corporation, in itself and as successor to UNARCO; PPG…

  2. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · December 23, 1981 · in the opinion

    Petes v. Hayes (1981)

    …was phrased "Does plaintiff, Alton Petes, suffer from disability or disease which specifically results from the inhalation of asbestos particles ..." (Emphasis added.) "Specifically" was not defined in the general charge. In its everyday usage, "specifically" is…

  3. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · November 29, 1993

    Johnstone v. American Oil Co. (1993)

    …seaman, died of mesothelioma. He and his wife sued his shipowner employers and asbestos product makers under the Jones Act and general maritime law, and his wife and children later pursued a wrongful death claim. Johnstone…

  4. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit · June 2, 1993

    Jackson v. Anchor Packing Co. (1993)

    …had worked at the plant for sixteen to twenty-three years between 1956 and 1979. Most were general tireworkers who did not handle the products. The complaint and the doctors' testimony said the workers had asbestosis…

  5. Company document · Motley 1000 · April 4, 1968

    F. H. Zimmerman to L. B. Crowell on J-M's Health Safety Booklet (1968)

    What it shows Those present included Certain-teed, the Ruberoid division of General Aniline & Film, J-M, and Mrs. Clytia Chambers of Hill and Knowlton, J-M's public relations counsel, with whom the booklet was…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Tennessee · January 9, 1984 · in the opinion

    Johnson County, Tenn. v. US Gypsum Co. (1984)

    While it is true that contractors who perform construction work for the state operated universities are not protected by general statutes of limitation, see Dunn v. W.F. Jameson and Sons, Inc., 569 S.W.2d…

  7. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · October 4, 2011

    Robertson v. Doug Ashy Building Materials, Inc. (2011)

    …at issue, and circumstantial evidence that a manufacturer bought the supplier's asbestos can create a fact question on exposure. A raw-asbestos supplier also owes the general duty of reasonable care. Causation; Product Identification; Expert…

  8. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · September 29, 1981 · in the opinion

    Bunker v. National Gypsum Co. (1981)

    …0 \ \ 0-9 \ 346 \ 89.6 \ 10.4 \ 36 \ 0 \ 0 \ \ ----------\ -------\ --------\ ----------\ ------\ ------\ ------\ \ Total \ 1,117 \ 51.5 \ 48.5 \ 366 \ 126 \ 50 \ The general purpose of a statute of limitations is to encourage prompt resolution of claims…

  9. Court case · Tennessee Supreme Court · June 7, 2011 · in the opinion

    Nye v. Bayer Cropscience, Inc. (2011)

    …plans of reorganization for Raybestos and Johns Manville had been confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court before Mrs. Nye filed her complaint.\[11\] As a general matter, confirmation of the plan of reorganization ends the automatic stay…

  10. Company document · Motley 1000 · April 17, 1968

    Frank H. Zimmerman of National Gypsum to C. L. Sheckler Opposing the Asbestos-Cement Health Safety Booklet (1968)

    …distribution of the booklet. The reasons given are: 1) No risk has been shown to the general public from exposure to asbestos-cement products manufactured for use in the building and construction industry. 2) The proposed…

  11. Court case · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · July 7, 1993 · in the opinion

    Behrendt v. GAF Corp. (1993)

    …fishing, woodworking. Mr. Behrendt's pain symptoms eventually led to a diagnosis of mesothelioma in December 1990. He was taken to the Emergency Room at Community General Osteopathic Hospital, Harrisburg, on December 23, 1990 with a…

  12. Court case · Texas Supreme Court · November 30, 2000 · in the opinion

    Pustejovsky v. Rapid-American Corp. (2000)

    …American argues that Pustejovsky's lack of knowledge of the scope of his damages from his exposure to asbestos does not affect the accrual of his cause of action. Following these general rules, Rapid American contends…

  13. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · February 20, 1998 · in the opinion

    Ruckstuhl v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)

    …The "minimum contacts" prong of the test can be broken down into two types of personal jurisdiction, specific and general. A state exercises "specific jurisdiction" over a non-resident defendant when the lawsuit arises from or…

  14. 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…

  15. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · August 11, 1998 · in the opinion

    McClure v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)

    …even though both individuals deny it. In any event, plaintiffs do not rely solely upon parallel action to prove their cases. A defendant who understands the general objectives of the conspiratorial scheme, accepts them, and agrees…

  16. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · October 26, 1982 · in the opinion

    Bunker v. National Gypsum Co. (1982)

    …validity of that limitation, this Court held: "We recognize the general rule that the legislature is the primary judge as to whether the time allowed by a statute of limitations is reasonable. Although the determination of…

  17. Court case · Illinois Supreme Court · October 21, 1999 · in the opinion

    McClure v. Owens Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1999)

    …could look beyond these problems, I still would not agree with the majority's decision. A defendant is liable as a conspirator where he understands the general objectives of the conspiratorial scheme, accepts them, and agrees…

  18. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit · July 12, 1985 · in the opinion

    Lee v. Celotex Corp. (1985)

    …through 1976 contained asbestos. However, in paragraph 2 of the general objections to those interrogatories, National Gypsum states that it answers those interrogatories "with reference to products that may have been used to insulate pipes, boilers…

  19. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania · May 7, 1992 · in the opinion

    Sealover v. Carey Canada (1992)

    …112 S.Ct. 1671, 118 L.Ed.2d 391 (New Rule 238 withstands constitutional challenges on due process and equal protection grounds.); Leonard v. General Motors Corp., Civil No. 88-2380, slip op. at 5 (E…

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

    Pecorino v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1988)

    …accrued to him not later than 1980. Furthermore, it should be noted that when the release was signed the Pecorinos did think about any exclusions or exceptions from the general, full and final release [\570] when…