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 · Kentucky Supreme Court · December 16, 2010

    Certainteed Corporation v. Dexter (2010)

    …Premises Owner Liability; Fault, Apportionment and Settlement Credits; Trial Procedure and Discovery Worksites: General Electric plant (Mount Vernon), Mount Vernon pipefitter General Electric plant (Mount Vernon) Mount Vernon 1969-1971; pipefitter 1963-1964; pipefitter 1946-1984

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Kentucky · October 26, 2015

    Brown v. Kentucky Utilities Company (2015)

    The court severed General Electric's third-party claims against the Tennessee Valley Authority, stayed them, declined supplemental jurisdiction and remanded the plaintiffs' claims to Jefferson Circuit Court, granting the plaintiffs' motion. After severing a federal…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · September 29, 2015 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2015)

    …also was the first nuclear plant to generate more than one billion watts of electric power.\[30\] The plant's three operating units are General Electric boiling water reactors. They produce electricity by splitting uranium atoms…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · June 22, 2015 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2015)

    …units are General Electric boiling water reactors. They produce electricity by splitting uranium atoms, and the heat generated by that process boils water, producing steam that is piped to turbines, which spin generators to produce electricity.…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · October 29, 2013 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Agco Corp. (2013)

    …\[and\] ... an implied restriction of the general authority is necessary to avoid grave interference with the performance of a governmental function, or that for other reasons it was plainly the purpose of Congress to use the…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · October 28, 2013 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Agco Corporation (2013)

    ….. an implied restriction of the general authority is necessary to avoid grave interference with the performance of a governmental function, or that for other reasons it was plainly the purpose of Congress to use the \sue…

  7. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · July 20, 2001 · in the opinion

    Black v. ACandS, Inc. (2001)

    …concluded that the plaintiff in McIntosh was not entitled to a remedy under Section 12 because "the General Assembly has determined that injuries occurring ten years after the product was delivered to a user are not…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · August 25, 2014 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2014)

    …Mrs. Bobo's contraction of pleural mesothelioma from laundering her husband's work clothes, purportedly containing asbestos dust originating from his job duties at TVA's Browns Ferry Nuclear power general facility in Limestone County, Alabama…

  9. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit · April 26, 2017 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2017)

    …AL, for Plaintiffs-Appellees. James S. Chase, Edward C. Meade, Edwin Warren Small, Tennessee Valley Authority, Office of General Counsel, KNOXVILLE, TN, for Defendant-Appellant. Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, JORDAN, Circuit Judge, and LAMBERTH,\[\\] District…

  10. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · April 26, 1999 · in the opinion

    Holmes v. ACandS, Inc. (1999)

    …year discovery based statute of limitations applicable to product liability claims. The comprehensiveness of the medical malpractice act is evidence of the legislature's intent that it should prevail over the more general wrongful death statute…

  11. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · January 10, 2002 · in the opinion

    Harris v. AC & S., Inc. (2002)

    …1995), trans. denied. In general, product liability actions must be brought within two years after the cause of action accrues or within ten years after the delivery of the product to the initial user or consumer…

  12. 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…

  13. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · March 25, 2003 · in the opinion

    Harris v. AC & S., Inc. (2003)

    …was proximately caused by his exposure to asbestos-containing products provided by the Defendants. The Indiana General Assembly has enacted two statutes that limit the period of time within which individuals can file product liability claims…