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

Search

135 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 6 of 7

  1. Court case · Delaware Superior Court · April 8, 2009

    Grenier v. General Motors Corp. (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2009)

    …despite factual errors in its earlier opinion, it properly denied General Motors' and Ford's motion to exclude plaintiffs' general causation expert testimony, so Grenier's experts remained admissible. A plaintiff's expert need not disprove…

  2. Court case · Pennsylvania Supreme Court · May 23, 2012 · in the opinion

    Betz v. Pneumo Abex LLC (2012)

    Indeed, Appellant Ford Motor Company reads the responsive expressions of members of this Court in two recent decisions as recognizing that the any-exposure opinion facially implicates the Frye test. See Summers, 606 Pa. at 318…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · September 17, 2018 · in the opinion

    Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec, LLC (2018)

    …the brands of brakes he worked on at Dexter, Mr. Jack testified that "\[s\]ome of them \[were\] Ford." (Id. at 131:17-20.) When Plaintiffs' counsel asked Mr. Jack if he used the arc grinder …

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana · May 28, 2015

    Hayes v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd. (2015)

    The court granted summary judgment to Honeywell (successor to Bendix) and Ford, dismissing plaintiffs' claims against them with prejudice for lack of product identification evidence. Under the Louisiana Products Liability Act, product identification is a threshold…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana · May 28, 2015

    Hayes v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd. (2015)

    The court granted summary judgment for Honeywell (successor to Bendix) and Ford, dismissing with prejudice the Hayes sons' claims over their father's mesothelioma death. Under the Louisiana Products Liability Act, a manufacturer is liable only…

  6. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · September 23, 2004

    In re Sears, Roebuck and Co. (2004)

    The court of appeals conditionally granted Sears and Ford's mandamus petitions, ordering the trial court to vacate its discovery orders because the requests for workers' compensation files, board minutes and violation records were overly broad…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 28, 2019 · in the opinion

    Jack v. Dco, LLC (2019)

    …those he encountered at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard." (Resp. DCo at 11; Resp. Ford at 12.) In particular, Plaintiffs emphasize that Mr. Jack testified in his deposition that, while he was working at the Shipyard…

  8. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 16, 2010 · in the opinion

    Teruel-Armstrong v. Borg-Warner Morsetec, Inc. (2010)

    …51 Cal.App.4th 1447; Mileikowsky v. Tenet Healthsystem (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 262; Karlsson v. Ford Motor Co. (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 1202; see also New Albertsons, supra, 168 Cal.App.4th at…

  9. Court case · New York Supreme Court · November 20, 2019

    Temperino v. Amchem Prods. (2019)

    …without prejudice to renewal at trial; Ford's motion was marked withdrawn. Conflicting expert reports on whether exposure caused lung cancer raise credibility issues that cannot be resolved on summary judgment. The court deferred ruling on…

  10. Court case · Indiana Court of Appeals · November 6, 2001

    Allied Signal, Inc. v. Herring (2001)

    …Statute of Limitations; Statute of Repose; Wrongful Death and Survival; Trial Procedure and Discovery Worksites: Cummins Engine Company plant; Cummins Engine Company, Inc., Columbus employee of Cummins Engine Company Cummins Engine Company, Inc. Columbus 1942-1978

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 26, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)

    …exposed to asbestos from Ford vehicles, plaintiffs' claims stand. Accordingly, Ford's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. v. Navistar, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment Navistar, Inc. (f/k/a International Harvester Company) contends that…

  12. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · April 30, 2010

    Betz v. Pneumo Abex LLC (2010)

    The Superior Court reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Allied Signal and Ford (and the other friction product defendants) and remanded, holding that the trial court wrongly granted the defendants' Frye motion excluding the…

  13. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · May 11, 2018

    Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Coates (2018)

    The Court of Special Appeals reversed the judgments for Coates against Mack Trucks and Ford on negligent failure to warn, and reversed the judgments for CertainTeed on Mack's and Ford's cross-claims, remanding for…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · August 31, 2017 · in the opinion

    Charlevoix v. Caterpillar (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2017)

    Charlevoix performed clutch and gasket work on Ford vehicles owned by family and friends. (D.I. 216, Ex. 3 at 152:16-19) However, Mr. Milligan could not recall the manufacturer of any clutches or gaskets…

  15. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit · August 23, 2018

    Waite v. Aii Acquisition Corp. (2018)

    James Waite lived in Massachusetts, where he was exposed to asbestos while renovating apartments in the late 1960s. The opinion says the joint compound he used contained asbestos mined and sold by Union Carbide. He moved to Florida in 1978,…

  16. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio · April 4, 2017

    Hart v. Honeywell International (2017)

    …warn claims, but denied it to Honeywell and Ford on the brake design defect claim, so the plaintiffs' case continued against those two; Ford's sanctions motion was denied. Under Ohio's Product Liability Act, a…

  17. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana · May 28, 2015

    Hayes v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd. (2015)

    Douglas Hayes sued several companies, including CNH America (sued as Case New Holland), claiming that asbestos exposure caused his mesothelioma. He died after filing, and his sons continued the case as a wrongful death and survival…

  18. Court case · Arkansas Supreme Court · July 5, 2002

    Chavers v. General Motors Corp. (2002)

    The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment for General Motors, AlliedSignal and Ford, rejecting the claims of Deidra Chavers over her husband's mesothelioma death. Arkansas adopts the 'frequency, regularity, and proximity…

  19. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · July 23, 2018 · in the opinion

    Gilbert v. Advance Auto Parts (2018)

    …John Price, only gave general deposition testimony that Ford was one of the main brands of vehicles \[Decedent\] worked on. While both of the aforementioned fact witnesses gave general testimony about \[Decedent\] performing brake jobs at…

  20. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · October 31, 2008

    Kummer v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2008)

    The court denied Viacom's summary judgment motion because genuine factual disputes remained on causation, and granted Ford's and GM's unopposed motions, so Mrs. Kummer's claims against Viacom go forward. Under general maritime…