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

Search

35 results for “Owens-Illinois”, page 1 of 2

  1. Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · March 15, 2007

    Vince v. Crane Co. (2007)

    …appeals court affirmed summary judgments for Crane Company and Goodyear Tire & Rubber against the estate of Nathalie Vince, and dismissed Owens-Illinois from the appeal because it had settled with the estate. Under Horton v. Harwick…

  2. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 11, 2008 · in the opinion

    Norris v. Crane Company (2008)

    …Indeed, both parties assumed that quite complicated design considerations were at issue, and that expert testimony was necessary to illuminate these matters." (Ibid.) In Sparks v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., supra, 32 Cal.App.4th at page…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland · July 25, 2016 · in the opinion

    Arbogast v. AW Chesterton Co. (2016)

    …cause of the injuries, and (4) that the product was expected to and did reach the consumer without substantial change in its condition." Phipps, 363 A.2d at 958, quoted in Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia…

  4. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · April 21, 2011 · in the opinion

    Linster v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2011)

    …J.H. France Refractories Co., J.P. Stevens, Inc., Melrath Gasket, Inc., Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., Owens-Illinois, Inc., Pecora Corporation, Rapid American Corporation, Rhone-Poulenc, Riley Stoker Corporation, Sepco Corporation, Inc., Sid Harvey Midatlantic, Inc…

  5. Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 25, 2009 · in the opinion

    Taylor v. Elliott Turbomachinery Co. Inc. (2009)

    …this argument, and Cadlo demonstrates that it is fundamentally flawed. We held in Cadlo that Owens-Illinois could not be held strictly liable for Kaylo, a product that it developed and then Taylor v. Elliott Turbomachinery…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · April 18, 2019 · in the opinion

    Rodrigue v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (2019)

    …for summary judgment, plaintiffs have either moved to dismiss or settled with the following defendants which were party to the Joint Defendants' motion: FMC Corporation,\[20\] Ingersoll-Rand Company,\[21\] McCarty Corporation,\[22\] Owens-Illinois, Inc.…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Hawaii · July 25, 2013 · in the opinion

    Cabasug v. Crane Co. (2013)

    …the function and role of the parties; (3) the types of vehicles and instrumentalities involved; and (4) the causation and nature of the injury suffered." Id. at 1121-22 (quoting Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. U.S…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 31, 2023 · in the opinion

    Elorreaga v. Rockwell Automation, Inc. (2023)

    …CV-00325-HSG, 2021 WL 1167638, at [\5] (N.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2021) (quoting Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal. 4th 953, 958, 67 Cal.Rptr.2d 16, 941 P.2d 1203 (Cal. 1997)…

  9. 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…

  10. Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · March 13, 2008 · in the opinion

    Woody v. AW Chesterton Company (2008)

    …Const. Co., Inc., 545 S.W.2d 8, 11-12 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1976); Ballinger v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 829 F.2d 38, No. 86-5755, 1987 WL 44451, at [\1] (6th Cir. Sept. 14, 1987…

  11. Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 31, 2014 · in the opinion

    Kent v. Warren Pumps, LLC (2014)

    …the defendant (cause-in-fact) and that there is a reasonable medical probability that such exposure was a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff's injury. (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953…

  12. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 30, 2021 · in the opinion

    Toy v. Armstrong Int'l (In re Asbestos, 2021)

    …that the California Supreme Court has not yet determined whether an "every exposure" theory of liability is consistent with the substantial factor test that applies in asbestos cases. See Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal…

  13. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · May 13, 2021 · in the opinion

    Toy v. Warren Pumps (In re Asbestos, 2021)

    …a substantial factor in causing Mr. Toy's injury and death. See McIndoe, 817 F.3d at 1174 (applying maritime law); see also Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal. 4th 953, 968-69 (Cal. 1997)…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Colorado · March 19, 2019 · in the opinion

    Mestas v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2019)

    …A trial is the appropriate means to determine what obligations, if any, each Defendant owes to Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs have not shown that they cannot obtain complete relief from any Defendant without the absent parties. Second…

  15. 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…

  16. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania · June 6, 2023 · in the opinion

    Gorton v. Warren Pumps, LLC (2023)

    …Id.) Mr. Gorton was told that the gaskets contained asbestos. (CCSMF (ECF No. 611) ¶ 56.) He testified that the gaskets were manufactured by Owens-Corning and CertainTeed. (CCSMF (ECF No. 611) ¶ 57.) During the overhaul, Mr…

  17. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · May 27, 2022 · in the opinion

    Hilster v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2022)

    …Aurora Pump Co., 2004 WL 2222935, at [\1] (Conn. Super. Sept. 14, 2004) (quoting Roberts v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 726 F. Supp. 172, 174 (W.D. Mich. 1989)). "The plaintiff must produce evidence sufficient to…

  18. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut · February 19, 2015 · in the opinion

    Bray v. Ingersoll-Rand Co. (2015)

    … Chavez v. Noble Drilling Corp., 567 F.2d 287, 289 (5th Cir. 1978); Sheffield v. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp., 595 So. 2d 443, 450 (Ala. 1992) (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts § 433b, comment a). \[5\] Defendant…

  19. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio · May 2, 2003 · in the opinion

    Lindstrom v. AC Products Liability Trust (2003)

    …that he has suffered damages, and 3) prove that defendant's asbestos-containing product was a substantial factor in causing his damages. Roberts v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 726 F.Supp. 172, 174 (W.D.Mich…

  20. Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · August 7, 2014 · in the opinion

    Logan v. Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. (2014)

    …case "must present \evidence of exposure to a specific product on a regular basis over some extended period of time in proximity to where the plaintiff actually worked.'" Jones v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. & Amchem Prods.…