- Organization: Porter Hayden Company
- Organization: Manville Personal Injury Settlement Trust
- Clear filters
20 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · August 28, 1996 · in the opinion
Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Garrett (1996)
…Fibreboard, Foster Wheeler, GAF Corporation, Garlock, General Electric, Owens-Illinois, Pittsburgh Corning and Westinghouse were cross-claim defendants. Crane Packing was found not liable and is not involved in this appeal. \[6\] See part III, section…
-
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.…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · April 3, 1997 · in the opinion
Anchor Packing Co. v. Grimshaw (1997)
…3\] (Emphasis added). In addition, the legislative history of C.J. § 11-108 indicates that the General Assembly intended that the cap apply broadly, as opposed to only malpractice claims. In January 1986, Senate Bill No…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · April 27, 1995 · in the opinion
ACandS, Inc. v. Asner (1995)
…Travelers"), PH's insurer, in which Travelers stated: The Travelers Insurance Company has been underwriting your Workmen's Compensation and General Liability since January 1953 and unfortunately, there have been some serious losses during this period…
-
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…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · April 10, 1992 · in the opinion
Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Balbos (1992)
Castleman also testified that some general-knowledge encyclopedias included notes on asbestosis as early as 1939 or 1940. The Court of Special Appeals reviewed this evidence and held that "\[a\] jury ... could reasonably infer that Porter…
-
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…
-
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…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · December 22, 1994 · in the opinion
Goss v. American Cyanamid Co. (1994)
…as a salesperson to the American Cyanamid plant that there should be an inference raised that he sold them asbestos containing products inasmuch as they were available to customers of Madsen & Howell in a general sense…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland · September 9, 2005 · in the opinion
National Union Fire Insurance Company OF Pittsburgh v. Porter Hayden Company (2005)
…large number of asbestos-related bodily injury claims filed against it. Wallace & Gale had purchased comprehensive general liability policies and excess policies from numerous insurers during the decades it installed asbestos-containing insulation materials. In 1994…
-
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 · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · December 22, 1989 · in the opinion
Sholtis v. American Cyanamid Co. (1989)
…theory of non-identification liability is acceptable in New Jersey. \[9\] The court "reserve\[d\] decision on the general appropriateness of including products with different degrees of risk in a market-share analysis." 116 N.J…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · October 18, 1995 · in the opinion
ACandS, Inc. v. Godwin (1995)
…we have now evidence of the consequences of exposure, but we do not have, in general, accurate measures of the levels of exposure occurring 20 or 30 years ago, which have given rise to these consequences…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · September 30, 1999 · in the opinion
Porter Hayden Company v. Wyche (1999)
…to the earliest diagnosis, from adenocarcinoma is 13.2 years." Although Porter Hayden seems to take issue in its reply brief with the use of general epidemiological testimony to draw inferences in specific cases, in Grimshaw…
-
Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Maryland · March 31, 2014 · in the opinion
National Union Fire Insurance Company OF Pittsburgh, PA. v. Porter Hayden Company (2014)
…expert uses to reach his conclusion; the court does not evaluate the conclusion itself," Schaefer, 325 F.3d at 240, although "conclusions and methodology are not entirely distinct from one another." General Elec. Co. v. Joiner…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · August 29, 1990 · in the opinion
Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Balbos (1990)
… 388 (1965), observing that the section had previously been adopted as a general principle in the duty to warn area by previous Maryland cases. Section 388 states as follows: Chattel Known to Be Dangerous for Intended…