11 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · December 2, 2016
Perez v. Air and Liquid Systems Corporation (2016)
The court granted General Electric's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction (without prejudice) and denied the motions by Air & Liquid Systems, Warren Pumps and John Crane to dismiss the loss of consortium count…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · June 30, 2011
Sublett v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2011)
…finding General Electric had not established federal officer removal jurisdiction. A removing defendant must show the Navy prevented it from complying with state-law warning duties to establish federal officer jurisdiction and the government contractor defense…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · November 30, 2016
Perez v. Air and Liquid Systems Corp. (2016)
…Crane Co. removed the case to federal court under the federal officer removal statute, and General Electric joined. Perez asked the court to send the case back to state court. She argued Crane waived removal by…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois · March 6, 2014 · in the opinion
Smith v. AW Chesterton Company (2014)
…INC.; SPIRAX SARCO, INC.; GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY; CBS CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, f/k/a Viacom Inc., successor by merger to CBS Corporation, a Pennsylvania Corporation, f/k/a Westinghouse Electric Corporation; FLOWSERVE US, INC. a…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · April 9, 2014
Hasenberg v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp. (2014)
…not make clear which defendants were sued in which counts, the court dismissed it without prejudice and ordered an amended complaint by May 9, 2014. It also noted general personal jurisdiction standards for a later motion.
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois · February 14, 2014 · in the opinion
Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014)
…Salisbury, 2014 WL 345214, at [\8]. This court will follow that middle path. In general, consistent with the bare metal defense, a manufacturer is not liable for materials it did not supply. But a duty may…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois · December 22, 2014 · in the opinion
Krik v. Crane Co. (2014)
…Arnold Brody, who intend to testify that, in general, each and every exposure to asbestos products results in injury to the person so exposed. Krik believes that this testimony will help him to establish that his…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · August 18, 2015 · in the opinion
Neureuther v. Atlas Copco Compressors, LLC (2015)
…person's expertise. Generalized knowledge of a particular subject will not necessarily enable an expert to testify as to a specific subset of the general field of the expert's knowledge. Martinez v. Sakurai Graphic Sys…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois · July 14, 2014 · in the opinion
Smith v. Crane Co. (2014)
…there are persuasive indications that the highest state court would decide the issue differently." Allen, 128 F.3d at 466; Clarin Corp. v. Massachusetts General Life Ins. Co., 44 F.3d 471, 474 (7th Cir. 1994)…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · August 28, 2015 · in the opinion
McALVEY v. Atlas Copco Compressors, LLC (2015)
…limited to the frequency, regularity and proximity of Plaintiff's exposure to asbestos products in general and his conclusion that Plaintiff experienced a significant exposure to asbestos based on his work activities. Finally, Defendants argue that…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · August 22, 2014 · in the opinion
Burns v. All Acquisitions, LLC (2014)
…alleging state law claims and there does not appear to be diversity of citizenship. "The well established general rule is that jurisdiction is determined at the time of removal and nothing filed after removal affects jurisdiction…