12 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut · September 17, 2007
Machnik v. Buffalo Pumps Inc. (2007)
The court denied Machnik's motion to remand to state court, finding that General Electric had justified federal officer removal, so the case stayed in federal court. A government contractor may remove under the federal officer…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut · October 27, 2008
Carroll v. Buffalo Pumps, Inc. (2008)
…Carrolls' motion to remand, holding that defendants Viad, General Electric and Buffalo Pumps properly removed the case under the federal officer removal statute. A defendant may remove under the federal officer statute, 28 U.S.C. …
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts · May 4, 2009
Holdren v. Buffalo Pumps, Inc. (2009)
…Foster Wheeler, Viad, General Electric and Elliott Turbo Machinery) removed the case to federal court. They relied on the federal officer removal statute and the federal contractor defense, arguing the Navy would not have allowed asbestos…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · November 19, 2015 · in the opinion
Estate OF Brust v. Acf Industries, LLC (2015)
…Westinghouse Electric Corp.; CARRIER CORPORATION; CERTAINTEED CORP., individually and as successor-in-interest to Gustin Bacon; EATON CORPORATION, as successor-in-interest to Eaton Electrical, Inc., and Cutler-Hammer, Inc.; FOSTER WHEELER ENERGY CORPORATION; GENERAL ELECTRIC…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 10, 2007
Caradonna v. AW Chesterton Co., Inc. (2007)
Joseph Caradonna worked for the Long Island Railroad from 1949 to 1977 as a mechanic's helper, welder, train car inspector, coach cleaner and assistant foreman. He claimed he was exposed to asbestos from brake shoes, gaskets and other materials. He…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii · February 7, 2014
Cabasug v. Crane Company (2014)
…court found no evidence that Emhart's distillers contained asbestos or that Emhart supplied asbestos replacement parts, since the plaintiffs relied on general expert statements about what manufacturers typically did. Griscom-Russell had dissolved in 1962…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Georgia · December 27, 2013
Cabasug v. Crane Company (2013)
…law, the court found no evidence that Emhart's distillers contained asbestos components or that Emhart supplied asbestos replacement parts, and the expert's statements were too general. The Griscom-Russell company dissolved in 1962, before…
-
Court case · U.S. Supreme Court · February 29, 2012 · in the opinion
Kurns v. Railroad Friction Products Corp. (2012)
…Ante, at 1268. That is insufficient. Not every state law that "could be said to affect tangentially" matters within the regulated field is pre-empted. English v. General Elec. Co., 496 U.S. 72, 85, 110…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of California · March 29, 2013 · in the opinion
Willis v. Buffalo Pumps, Inc. (2013)
…officer) ... for or relating to any act under color of such office..." II. DISCUSSION In general, a defendant can only remove a case to federal court if the plaintiff could have brought the action there originally…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · February 3, 2009 · in the opinion
Kurns v. AW Chesterton (2009)
…612. The Supreme Court struck down the state law, reasoning that: \[T\]he power delegated to the \[Interstate Commerce\] Commission by the Boiler Inspection Act as amended is a general one. It extends to the design…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · December 4, 2013 · in the opinion
Perry v. AW Chesterton, Inc. (2013)
…U.S. at 611, 47 S.Ct. 207. Congress had bestowed upon the Interstate Commerce Commission the "general" power (which now rests with the Secretary of Transportation, see Kurns, 132 S.Ct. at 1266 n. 3…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · September 9, 2010 · in the opinion
Kurns v. AW Chesterton Inc. (2010)
…of LIA preemption. In Napier, the Court held that "the power delegated to the \[Interstate Commerce\] Commission\[\[4\]\] by the Boiler Inspection Act as amended is a general one. It extends to the design, the construction…