7 results for “Owens-Illinois”
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 19, 2021 · in the opinion
Toy v. Armstrong Int'l (In re Asbestos, 2021)
…Dkt. No. 418 at 5. But Plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing that exposure to Defendants' products was a substantial factor causing his illness. See Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal. 4th 953, 982 (Cal…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · May 20, 2021 · in the opinion
Toy v. Armstrong Int'l (In re Toy Asbestos, 2021)
…exposed to asbestos from Defendant's products; and (2) this exposure was a substantial factor in causing Mr. Toy's injury and death. See Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal. 4th 953, 968-69 (Cal…
-
Court case · Tennessee Supreme Court · January 4, 2021 · in the opinion
Coffman v. Armstrong International, Inc. (2021)
…statutory construction is to ascertain and give effect to the legislative intent without unduly restricting or expanding a statute's coverage beyond its intended scope." Howard, 504 S.W.3d at 269 (quoting Owens v. State…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · November 9, 2021 · in the opinion
Data v. AO Smith Corporation (2021)
…of such a nature as to raise a reasonable inference that \[s\]he inhaled asbestos fibers that emanated from it.'" Wilson, 807 A.2d at 923 (quoting Coward v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 1999 Pa. Super…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 18, 2021 · in the opinion
Kriz v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2021)
In opposition to Armstrong's motion, Plaintiff argues that a product manufacturer like Armstrong owes innocent persons injured from its defective product, like decedent, a clear duty to warn under New York law, especially in "take…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · February 1, 2012 · in the opinion
Conner v. Alfa Laval, Inc. (2012)
…now holds that, under maritime law, a manufacturer is not liable for harm caused by, and owes no duty to warn of the hazards inherent in, asbestos products that the manufacturer did not manufacture or distribute.
-
Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · July 22, 2019 · in the opinion
Coffman v. Armstrong International, Inc. (2019)
…e have no basis to conclude in this diversity case that the Tennessee Supreme Court would overrule its prior decisions holding that a manufacturer owes no duty of care to consumers of products made by others…