10 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · July 22, 2011
Conner v. Alfa Laval, Inc. (2011)
Four consolidated asbestos cases in the federal asbestos MDL in Pennsylvania involved Navy veterans or a shipyard worker who developed mesothelioma. Robert Conner, James Prange and James Stone served at sea on Navy ships as a machinist's mate and…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · March 13, 2017
Bell v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corp. (2017)
William Bell served in the U.S. Navy in the 1960s as an engineman, machinery repairman and machinist mate and was regularly exposed to asbestos. Most exposure was on four ships, where maritime law was already settled as governing. He also claimed…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · March 6, 2017
Bell v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corp. (2017)
…DOHSA does not bar a survival action, which proceeds under general maritime law. Under general maritime law a seaman's survivors may recover only pecuniary losses, but pre-death pain and suffering is treated as pecuniary…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · July 21, 2011
Conner v. Alfa Laval, Inc. (2011)
Four consolidated asbestos cases in the federal MDL-875 docket involved Navy-related mesothelioma. Robert Conner, James Prange and James Stone served aboard Navy ships, working with engine rooms, fire rooms and boilers. Hiram Peavy worked as a…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · April 21, 2011 · in the opinion
Linster v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2011)
…Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc., Dana Corporation, Durabla, Durametallic Corporation, Foster Wheeler Corporation, Garlock Inc., General Electric Company, General Refractories, Georgia-Pacific Corporation, Goulds Pumps, Inc., Green, Tweed & Company, Hajoca Plumbing Supply Company, Hercules Chemical Co.…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 25, 2009 · in the opinion
Taylor v. Elliott Turbomachinery Co. Inc. (2009)
…specifications does not deprive them of the component parts defense. In Artiglio v. General Electric Co. (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 830 \[71 Cal.Rptr.2d 817\], the defendant manufactured silicone in accordance with "particular specifications…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut · February 19, 2015 · in the opinion
Bray v. Ingersoll-Rand Co. (2015)
…24 (Crane); 84:6-24 (same). He was able to recall only the brands Westinghouse and General Electric without prompting. Choate was prompted to describe certain elements of the products he recalled, such as their label…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · March 13, 2012 · in the opinion
Rabovsky v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp. (2012)
…the order of November 1, 2011, denied Pennsylvania Electric's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. As a general rule, a magistrate judge cannot "determine" a motion for judgment on the pleadings. See 28 U.S…
-
Court case · Tennessee Supreme Court · January 4, 2021 · in the opinion
Coffman v. Armstrong International, Inc. (2021)
There the canon avoids not contradiction but the superfluity of a specific provision that is swallowed by the general one, "violat\[ing\] the cardinal rule that, if possible, effect shall be given to every clause and…
-
Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · July 22, 2019 · in the opinion
Coffman v. Armstrong International, Inc. (2019)
…the general duty of care includes a duty to warn when the manufacturer "knows or has reason to know" that its product "is or is likely to be dangerous for the use for which it is…