12 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · June 5, 2018
Turcotte v. 3M Company (2018)
…single injury, different states' laws cannot be applied defendant by defendant. Statute of Repose; Compensatory Damages; Fault, Apportionment and Settlement Credits; Choice of Law Worksites: construction project in Florida electrician; electrician construction project in Florida 1973
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · September 8, 2010
Horn v. A.W. Chesterson Co. (In re Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig., 2010)
Ten asbestos cases, brought by plaintiffs represented by the same law firm, were assigned to one New York County judge for trial. Eight of the plaintiffs, alleging mesothelioma, asked the court to consolidate their cases into three groups for joint…
-
Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · July 22, 2015
Baumgartner v. American Standard, Inc. (2015)
Dennis Baumgartner, an Ohio man diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2013, and his wife Gail sued many makers of valves, boilers and turbines in Rhode Island. He had worked as an insulator and insulator helper at jobsites in Ohio and, occasionally,…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 8, 2010 · in the opinion
Reaser v. AW Chesterton Company (2010)
…whether substantial evidence supports the trial court's finding that a suitable forum exists. (Guimei v. General Electric Co. (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 689, 696.) Here appellants claim the lower court erred in finding that…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · December 27, 2023 · in the opinion
Servedio v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2023)
…OWENS-ILLINOIS, INC, PEERLESS INDUSTRIES, INC, PFIZER, INC. (PFIZER), REYNOLDS METALS COMPANY, RHEEM MANUFACTURING COMPANY, SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC USA, INC. FORMERLY KNOWN AS, SLANT/FIN CORPORATION, U.S. RUBBER COMPANY (UNIROYAL), UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, WEIL-McLAIN, A…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division · July 3, 2014 · in the opinion
Konstantin v. Tishman Liquidating Corp. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig., 2014)
…but then Dr. Moline gave general testimony concerning the pain associated with mesothelioma without distinguishing between the two men. Initially, the issue of consolidation is properly before us and we reject the Konstantin plaintiff's contention…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · April 18, 2016 · in the opinion
DePriest v. Crane Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig., 2016)
…Here, the evidence that plaintiffs' medical experts intend to submit has the potential to sufficiently establish a general connection between asbestos and mesothelioma, as well as a scientific expression of plaintiffs' exposure levels based on Stagnito…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Central District of California · February 12, 2013 · in the opinion
Nelson v. Air and Liquid Systems Corp. (2013)
…2012) ("As a general rule, the existence of removal jurisdiction is determined at the time the removal petition is filed, irrespective of subsequent events. Federal courts have applied this general rule to federal officer removal jurisdiction…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina · July 3, 2014 · in the opinion
Harris v. Ajax Boiler, Inc. (2014)
…the overhaul of any of the defendants' boilers. Plaintiff has no evidence to show that defendants' boilers required the use of an asbestos-containing cement, in general, or Narcolite in particular, to affect a proper repair…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · January 21, 2016 · in the opinion
Holzworth v. Alfa Laval Inc. (2016)
…in causing the injury he suffered." See Lindstrom v. A-C Prod. Liab. Tr., 424 F.3d 488, 492 (6th Cir. 2005) (general maritime law); In re Joint E. & S. Dists. Asbestos Litig., No. 92 Civ…
-
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…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · November 6, 2013 · in the opinion
Peraica v. Crane Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig., 2013)
…such as Peraica were at high risk of injury due to high-dose asbestos exposure from removing ACMs from Defendant's boilers (far more than a general awareness of the linkage between asbestos exposure and disease)…