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

Search

13 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · South Carolina Court of Appeals · June 11, 2001 · in the opinion

    Murphy v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (2001)

    …Corporation, ACandS, Inc., Rock Wool Manufacturing Co., Inc., The Anchor Packing Company, Rapid American Corporation, Garlock, Inc., Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Uniroyal, Inc., PPG Industries, Inc., Covil Corporation, E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Company, Defendants…

  2. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · December 28, 2000 · in the opinion

    Hollingsworth v. Connor (2000)

    …appropriate. Appellants assert that a determination as to whether there was insufficient knowledge of the manufacturer or of the scientific field in general would have been relevant in order to determine whether the Kent cigarettes, and…

  3. Court case · Missouri Court of Appeals · May 22, 1990 · in the opinion

    Hagen v. Rapid American Corp. (1990)

    …512.020 RSMo. 1986. We first address this latter question. The right of appeal exists solely by virtue of statute. Harris v. Union Electric Co., 685 S.W.2d 607, 611 (Mo.App. 1985). Section 512…

  4. Court case · Florida Supreme Court · October 15, 2018 · in the opinion

    DeLisle v. Crane Co. (2018)

    …in every proceeding. However, this Court's case law makes clear that a proper and thorough application of Frye allows the trial judge to inquire [\1235] beyond bare assertions of general acceptance. Daubert, on the other…

  5. Court case · New York Supreme Court · April 9, 2008

    Barnes v. AO Smith Water Products Co. (2008)

    …the Montross, Perdicaro, Enea and Iqbal cases separate, over the defendants' general opposition. Under CPLR 602(a), actions with common questions of law or fact may be tried jointly. The Malcolm factors guide the choice, and…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Central District of California · June 14, 2012 · in the opinion

    Couscouris v. Hatch Grinding Wheels, Inc. (2012)

    …2012. United States District Court, C.D. California. CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL GEORGE H. KING, District Judge. Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order re: Motion for Remand and for Award of Costs Incurred This matter is before us on…

  7. Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · February 14, 2014 · in the opinion

    McGuire v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014)

    …been a strictly personal choice, yet it was a thing of comfort and convenience to himself while he was serving as maintenance man and general custodian and while he was on call at all hours. Therefore…

  8. Court case · New York Supreme Court · December 12, 2018 · in the opinion

    Prokocimer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2018)

    …continuing general belief that exposure to asbestos below the TLV of the time period of 5 million particles per cubit foot ("mppcf") of air did not represent a hazard to workers. There was no general recognition…

  9. Court case · Wisconsin Supreme Court · October 27, 1999 · in the opinion

    Sopha v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1999)

    …Wisconsin would not turn a deaf ear to argument that in a particular sort of case the policy reasons [\236] for allowing an exception override the policy reasons for applying the general rule. 236 Patzer v…

  10. 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…

  11. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 13, 1996 · in the opinion

    Hansen v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1996)

    …is one of the four plaintiffs in the wrongful death action of Mary Hansen. [\761] (5) "The general rule is that \an appeal reviews the correctness of a judgment as of the time of its rendition…

  12. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · September 4, 1997 · in the opinion

    In re Celotex Corp. (1997)

    …exposure thereto.... (J.A. 44-45). Rapid's claim against the Celotex bankruptcy estate was principally based upon a written agreement entitled "General Assignment & Assumption of Liabilities," (J.A. 52), wherein Celotex's predecessor in interest…

  13. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · August 30, 2018 · in the opinion

    Steiner v. Hollingsworth & Vose Company (2018)

    …s Brief, at 1. "Collateral review is appropriate, despite the general directive that appellate courts conduct review only of final orders, if an order is (1) separable from and collateral to the main cause of action, …