24 results for “General Electric”, page 1 of 2
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit · January 31, 1990
Kraciun v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1990)
…Nemours & Co. plant, Clinton, Iowa Clinton 1953 onward (except Navy 1954-1958); service crew, general maintenance worker and electrical maintenance worker E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. plant, Clinton, Iowa Clinton 1948-1985; maintenance person…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Colorado · March 13, 1989 · in the opinion
Miller v. Celotex Corp. (1989)
…defendants. I conclude that plaintiff has failed to present sufficient persuasive evidence for a reasonable jury to rule in his favor on the running of the statute of limitations. See Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Zenith…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · January 30, 1986 · in the opinion
Lohrmann v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp. (1986)
…a given industry. They are often set forth in some type of code, such as a building code or electrical code, or they may be adopted by the trade organization of a given industry. State of…
-
Court case · North Carolina Supreme Court · November 5, 1985 · in the opinion
Wilder v. Amatex Corp. (1985)
…E.2d 281 (1972); Galligan v. Chapel Hill, 276 N.C. 172, 171 S.E.2d 427 (1970); Domestic Electric Service Co., Inc. v. Rocky Mount, 20 N.C.App. 347, 201 S.E.2d 508…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Virginia · July 19, 1984 · in the opinion
Joyce v. AC & s., Inc. (1984)
…asbestos insulation materials. Plaintiff, an industrial electrician who had worked with asbestos insulation from 1948 to 1972, claimed that inhalation of asbestos fibers and dust during that period had caused him to develop mesothelioma, a cancerous…
-
Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · April 19, 1982 · in the opinion
Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1982)
…Rather, defendants state, the cost "will be borne by the public at large and reflected in a general, across the board increase in premiums to compensate for unanticipated risks." There is some truth in this assertion…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · February 28, 1986 · in the opinion
Joyce v. AC and S., Inc. (1986)
No ordinary disease of life to which the general public is exposed outside of the employment shall be compensable, except: (1) When it follows as an incident of occupational disease as defined in this title; or…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit · November 28, 1988 · in the opinion
Menne v. Celotex Corp. (1988)
…113 (3d Cir.1985) (evidence of general use of Pittsburgh Corning's Unibestos at job site was sufficient to allow jury to find Pittsburgh Corning to be a factor in causing the plaintiff's injury). \[13…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · January 11, 1982 · in the opinion
Bertrand v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)
…discretion to determine when it should be applied. The general rule should be that in cases where a plaintiff could easily have joined in the earlier action or where, either for the reasons discussed above or…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · January 14, 1980 · in the opinion
Mooney v. Fibreboard Corp. (1980)
…discretion to determine when it should be applied. The general rule should be that in cases where a plaintiff could easily have joined in the earlier action or where, either for the reasons discussed above or…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · November 19, 1984 · in the opinion
Colombo v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1984)
13, 68 L.Ed.2d 1 (1981) (federal law shall govern issues arising in negligence actions under LHWCA section 5(b)) with Edmonds v. Compagnie Generale Atlantique, 443 U.S. 256, 272 n. 31, 99 S…
-
Court case · Florida District Court of Appeal · December 31, 1985 · in the opinion
Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. Cox (1985)
…at 120. The rule against splitting was designed to function in precisely the opposite manner and to rigidly apply it here would do "violence to the essence and purpose of the general rule." Martinez-Ferrer v…
-
Court case · Florida District Court of Appeal · February 5, 1985 · in the opinion
Meehan v. Celotex Corp. (1985)
…of the negligent act. Indeed, as Gaboury itself says: "In determining the proper forum in which to bring suit under the general statute fixing venue where the cause of action \arose', or \accrued', the \injury occurred…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · March 23, 1984 · in the opinion
Adams v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1984)
…a "less desirable longshoreman" in the future. Id. at 668. Bonura is inapposite to the case at bar. Bonura was decided under general maritime law, not Louisiana law. Furthermore, the instant record does not support an…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · June 3, 1985 · in the opinion
Gideon v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1985)
…Court has expressly held, in Turner v. General Motors Corporation,\[36\] that, although evidence of the expectations of the ordinary consumer and the care of a prudent manufacturer may be introduced at trial, "henceforth in the…
-
Court case · Colorado Supreme Court · September 16, 1991 · in the opinion
Miller v. Armstrong World Industries (1991)
…each possible disease related to asbestos exposure has a separate limitations period. "If this is an unfair result, the remedy for its correction lies with the General Assembly" and not with this court. Crownover v. Gleichman…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · December 22, 1989 · in the opinion
Sholtis v. American Cyanamid Co. (1989)
…theory of non-identification liability is acceptable in New Jersey. \[9\] The court "reserve\[d\] decision on the general appropriateness of including products with different degrees of risk in a market-share analysis." 116 N.J…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit · April 13, 1989 · in the opinion
Kaiser v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (1989)
…late 1985 or early 1986 that he suffered from asbestosis. The Kaisers filed this lawsuit seeking general and special damages for Kaiser's asbestos-related injuries on August 15, 1986. III. All parties accept in their…
-
Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · December 29, 1988 · in the opinion
Pecorino v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1988)
…accrued to him not later than 1980. Furthermore, it should be noted that when the release was signed the Pecorinos did think about any exclusions or exceptions from the general, full and final release [\570] when…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Columbia · October 28, 1981 · in the opinion
Fearson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981)
…The defendants' first argument is that plaintiff's "survival" claim is time-barred under the law of the District of Columbia, which provides that the general period of limitations is three years. See D.C.Code …