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

Search

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

  1. 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…

  2. Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · March 6, 1981 · in the opinion

    Locke v. Johns-Manville (1981)

    …the defendants in the November 1978 order appealed from. The record shows that since approximately 1948 plaintiff had been employed as an industrial electrician by various contractors at sites in Virginia, New York and North Carolina…

  3. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit · March 30, 1983 · in the opinion

    Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc. (1983)

    …appears that the tests are the same, since, in general "\[o\]nce admiralty jurisdiction is established, then all of the substantive rules and precepts peculiar to the law of the sea become applicable." Brance v. Shumann…

  4. Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · April 5, 1984 · in the opinion

    Weinberg v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1984)

    …Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof." 28 U.S.C…

  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 · New Jersey Supreme Court · April 19, 1982 · in the opinion

    Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1982)

    …Rather, defendants state, the cost "will be borne by the public at large and reflected in a general, across the board increase in premiums to compensate for unanticipated risks." There is some truth in this assertion…

  9. Court case · Minnesota Supreme Court · May 14, 1982 · in the opinion

    DeCosse v. Armstrong Cork Co. (1982)

    …the court concluded that because the tolling provisions of the general limitations statute were in existence prior to the enactment of the wrongful death statute the legislature "could not possibly have had in mind that the…

  10. Court case · Illinois Supreme Court · February 6, 1986 · in the opinion

    Costello v. Unarco Industries, Inc. (1986)

    …242.) Applying a rule of reasonableness it was concluded that the intent of the General Assembly was that the time within which the cause of action may be discovered cannot remain open-ended and that it…

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · January 11, 1982 · in the opinion

    Bertrand v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)

    …discretion to determine when it should be applied. The general rule should be that in cases where a plaintiff could easily have joined in the earlier action or where, either for the reasons discussed above or…

  12. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · July 26, 1982 · in the opinion

    Hardy v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)

    …Borel, we conclude that Borel, while conclusive as to the general matter of a duty to warn on the part of manufacturers of asbestos-containing insulation products, is ultimately ambiguous as to certain key issues. As…

  13. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · January 14, 1980 · in the opinion

    Mooney v. Fibreboard Corp. (1980)

    …discretion to determine when it should be applied. The general rule should be that in cases where a plaintiff could easily have joined in the earlier action or where, either for the reasons discussed above or…

  14. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · May 9, 1991 · in the opinion

    Wehmeier v. Unr Industries, Inc. (1991)

    …OSHA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Solomon stated it was his general impression that the level of asbestos used at UNARCO's Bloomington plant was not safe. Solomon stated he never saw chrysotile asbestos ground…

  15. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · June 3, 1985 · in the opinion

    Gideon v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1985)

    …Court has expressly held, in Turner v. General Motors Corporation,\[36\] that, although evidence of the expectations of the ordinary consumer and the care of a prudent manufacturer may be introduced at trial, "henceforth in the…

  16. 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…

  17. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · July 30, 1993 · in the opinion

    Adcock v. Brakegate, Ltd. (1993)

    …under Illinois common law. However, Fahner does not represent that conclusion because it involved a statutory enforcement action brought by the Illinois Attorney General pursuant to the Illinois Antitrust Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.1975, ch. 38…

  18. 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…

  19. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Columbia · October 28, 1981 · in the opinion

    Fearson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981)

    …The defendants' first argument is that plaintiff's "survival" claim is time-barred under the law of the District of Columbia, which provides that the general period of limitations is three years. See D.C.Code …

  20. 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…