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

Search

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

  1. 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…

  2. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · June 2, 2004 · in the opinion

    Torrejon v. Mobil Oil Co. (2004)

    …Torrejon was uncertain as to the length of time he was there. • General Electric — worked on boilers and turbines and the heating and cooling system. • Colonial House (a hotel) in Las Vegas — 1959 to early 1960…

  3. 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…

  4. 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…

  5. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · July 16, 1991 · in the opinion

    Fibreboard Corp. v. Pool (1991)

    …1969). Quantifying probability, it means a more than fifty percent chance. See Fidelity & Guaranty Ins. Underwriters v. Gary Douglas Electric, 48 Ohio App.2d 319, 357 N.E.2d 388, 392 (1974). Dr. J.D. Britton…

  6. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · January 28, 1998 · in the opinion

    Re' v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)

    …J., dissents with reasons. BYRNES, Judge, dissenting with reasons. When the Louisiana Supreme Court in Jordan v. Central Louisiana Electric Co., Inc., 95-1270 (La.6/23/95), 656 So.2d 988, 989 held that the…

  7. 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…

  8. 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…

  9. 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…

  10. 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…

  11. 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…

  12. 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…

  13. 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…

  14. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · August 12, 1996 · in the opinion

    Nelson v. Keene Corp. (1996)

    …pleadings shall be according to the rules." 735 ILCS 5/2-201(a) (West 1994). General jurisdiction is invoked in the trial court when an action is filed and a summons is issued and served upon…

  15. 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…

  16. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · March 1, 2013 · in the opinion

    Motions for Access OF Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC (2013)

    …regardless of their motive for inspecting such records. Thus, the press has no greater right of access than does the general public, and more importantly, an intervenor who is also a litigant in a collateral proceeding…

  17. 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…

  18. 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…

  19. Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware · October 7, 2011 · in the opinion

    In re ACandS, Inc. (2011)

    …filed),\[12\] or a ballot is filed with respect to the plan of reorganization,\[13\] the details of the putative creditor's interests have been kept from general public view to [\98] retain and protect privacy…

  20. Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware · December 21, 2012 · in the opinion

    In re the Flintkote Company (2012)

    …depends upon (i) whether under state law a corporation is permitted to bring an alter ego claim; and (ii) "whether the claim is a general claim that is common to all creditors." Rosener v. Majestic Mgmt.…