9 results for “Reaction Department”
-
Company document · Motley 1000 · June 12, 1956
W. G. Hazard to Ira I. Brought Sending the Saranac Kaylo Article (1956)
…Brought's call is Motley document 188; the article is Motley document 103. In Johns-Manville's index Johns-Manville's legal department indexed the Motley 1,000 in 1984. Its index describes this document as…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit · August 13, 1982 · in the opinion
Neubauer v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1982)
…and a study to be published by the Labor Department estimates that at least 8,500 workers — perhaps as many as 10,000 — will die each year until the end of this century from asbestos-related…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · January 21, 1994 · in the opinion
Tabolt v. Flintkote Co. (In re New York Asbestos Litigation, 1994)
Flintkote's argument that this procedure provides a double recovery for inflation was rejected after thorough attention by the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court, Fourth Department, in Brown v. State, 184 A.D…
-
Company document · JM Knowledge Chronology · June 12, 1956
W. G. Hazard of Owens-Illinois to Ira I. Brought on Kaylo and the Saranac Experiments (1956)
…1948). Writing to an outside consultant, Hazard describes the finding as a mild reaction and compares Kaylo favorably with the asbestos dust insulators already breathed. The attached article is written up separately (Schepers, Durkan and Delahant…
-
Company document · 1988
Owens-Illinois's Responses to Plaintiffs' First Interrogatories in Bexley v. Armstrong World Industries (1988)
…answers. Compare Owens Corning's 1997 answers, which say Owens-Illinois told it in 1956 that the Saranac animals "could develop a mild asbestosis reaction." About this copy Exhibit I (pp. 28–33) lists the journals…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit · August 28, 1995 · in the opinion
Consorti v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (1995)
…of cases which involve substantially the same questions of fact, as happens when large numbers of plaintiffs allege that they have developed similar illnesses in reaction to a particular toxic substance. See Fed.R.Civ.P…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · March 21, 1996
Holbrook v. Lykes Bros. SS Co., Inc. (1996)
…since diagnosis and cause were the central issues. It upheld the admission of the defense radiation experts and the redaction of mesothelioma references in records. It found no unfair judicial conduct and refused a new judge…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · January 22, 1997 · in the opinion
Sharpless v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas (1997)
…obesity, asthma, emphysema and allergic reactions." In view of the above-stated principles, the court finds that it is compelled to review the contents of Dr. Altschuler's testimony quite carefully to determine (1) whether it…