37 results for “General Electric”, page 1 of 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…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit · March 30, 1983 · in the opinion
Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc. (1983)
…appears that the tests are the same, since, in general "\[o\]nce admiralty jurisdiction is established, then all of the substantive rules and precepts peculiar to the law of the sea become applicable." Brance v. Shumann…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · Illinois Supreme Court · October 25, 1983 · in the opinion
Froud v. Celotex Corp. (1983)
…2d 199, 214-15, 90 S.Ct. 1583, 1595-96 (Black, J., dissenting); General Dynamics Corp., Electric Boat Division, v. Benefits Review Board (2d Cir.1977), 565 F.2d 208, 212; Williams v. Ray (1978), 146…
-
Court case · Hawaii Supreme Court · May 3, 1984 · in the opinion
Nobriga v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc. (1984)
…P.2d 509 (1970), we noted that "\[t\]he general rule in measuring damages is \to give a sum of money to the person wronged which as nearly as possible, will restore him to the position…
-
Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · April 19, 1982 · in the opinion
Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1982)
…Rather, defendants state, the cost "will be borne by the public at large and reflected in a general, across the board increase in premiums to compensate for unanticipated risks." There is some truth in this assertion…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · January 22, 1986 · in the opinion
Jackson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1986)
…they have already been punished enough. They stated to the trial judge that punitive damages serve to motivate "private attorneys general" to bring suit, but argued that persons injured by asbestos have motivation enough to sue…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · July 26, 1982 · in the opinion
Hardy v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)
…Borel, we conclude that Borel, while conclusive as to the general matter of a duty to warn on the part of manufacturers of asbestos-containing insulation products, is ultimately ambiguous as to certain key issues. As…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Supreme Court · June 10, 1986 · in the opinion
Morgan v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1986)
…Inc., Rapid American, Uni-Royal, Carolina Asbestos Co., J. Franklin Burke General Asbestos Co., Ruberoid Company, Keaseey Mattison Co., Asten Hill Manufacturing Co. Argued December 17, 1985. Filed June 10, 1986. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. [\60…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · January 21, 1985 · in the opinion
Jackson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1985)
…As a consequence, federal courts would become increasingly responsible for establishing a general federal tort law in a manner we think is inconsistent with the teachings of Erie and the logic behind our federal system. Cf…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit · December 30, 1982 · in the opinion
Murphree v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc. (1982)
…Tennessee's various statutes of limitations governing products liability actions has created troublesome problems for Tennessee courts in the past two decades. In 1969 the Tennessee Supreme Court in Jackson v. General Motors, 223 Tenn. 12…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · March 13, 1981 · in the opinion
Hardy v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981)
…to be persuaded that the choice of law made in Flatt is correct. That is, under any standard, federal law applies. Aerojet-General Corporation v. Askew, 511 F.2d 710 [\1361] (5th Cir. 1975); Willis v…