17 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · May 19, 2014
Rost v. Ford Motor Company (2014)
Richard Rost and his wife Joyce sued Ford Motor Company and other defendants, alleging that asbestos exposure caused his mesothelioma. All defendants except Ford settled before trial. Rost testified that in 1950 he worked for several months at a…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 26, 2022 · in the opinion
Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)
…or supplying an asbestos-containing product. Nonetheless, plaintiffs argue that General Electric can be held liable for its failure to warn of the dangers associated with asbestos insulation. According to plaintiffs, defendant was aware that asbestos…
-
Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · February 25, 2005
Rehm v. Navistar International (2005)
James Rehm, a millwright employed by Rapid Installation from about 1975 to 1982, was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2001 and died in 2002. He, and later his wife as executrix and his children, sued sixteen companies that owned the facilities where…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland · February 21, 2017 · in the opinion
Fish v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2017)
…by Patrick C. Smith, Dehay and Elliston LLP & David Schuyler Blow, Sedgwick LLP, pro hac vice. General Electric CompanyCross Defendant, represented by David J. Quigg, Meringer Zois and Quigg LLC. Genuine Parts CompanyCross Defendant, represented by…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · January 8, 1998 · in the opinion
Ford Motor v. Wood (1998)
…a duty to warn of dangers inherent in maintaining and repairing the manufacturer's products, do not persuade us to the contrary. Bich v. General Electric Co., 27 Wash.App. 25, 614 P.2d 1323 (1980)…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · October 31, 2008
Kummer v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2008)
…remained on causation, and granted Ford's and GM's unopposed motions, so Mrs. Kummer's claims against Viacom go forward. Under general maritime law, using the Pennsylvania-based "regularity, frequency and proximity" test, direct evidence…
-
Court case · Georgia Court of Appeals · March 10, 2022 · in the opinion
Sinyard v. Georgia Power Company (2022)
The record shows that Georgia Power is the majority owner of both plants, with the balance owned by Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, the City of Dalton, and Oglethorpe Power Company. But under the terms of…
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · August 20, 2015 · in the opinion
Oddo v. Asbestos Corporation Ltd. (2015)
…Inc. (Higgins") between 1947 and 1954; working as an appliance repairman for Westinghouse Electric in the late 1950s; working on diesel truck rigs for Cummins Sales & Services ("Cummins") in the 1960s; working for Lummis as an…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Delaware · August 31, 2017 · in the opinion
Charlevoix v. Caterpillar (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2017)
…of 1963. (Id.) D. Plaintiff's product identification evidence Caterpillar Inc. Mr. Charlevoix stated that he performed maintenance work on eight Caterpillar bulldozers during his time at M.J. Electric. (D.I. 155, Ex. 1 at…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania · March 19, 2018 · in the opinion
Gorton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp. (2018)
…4.) Specifically, Mr. Gorton performed "brake jobs, minor repairs, electrical repairs, and even pump\[ed\]...gas." (ECF No. 230-2 at 2, 5.) Mr. Gorton while employed by Olson Brothers performed "\[p\]robably a half a…
-
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…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · November 20, 2019
Temperino v. Amchem Prods. (2019)
…cigarettes a day for about 37 years. Honda moved for summary judgment, arguing plaintiff could not prove general or specific causation. Several other defendants asked the court to bar plaintiff's medical experts and, if successful…
-
Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · October 7, 2011 · in the opinion
Rehm v. Ford Motor Company (2011)
…Daubert rubric." Id. Dr. Morgan reviewed two articles detailing studies which had concluded that elevator mechanics carry a greater risk of developing asbestos-related diseases than the general population. He further recounted that it was established…
-
Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · February 3, 2011 · in the opinion
Welsh v. Ford Motor Co. (2011)
…its first assignment of error, Ford contends that plaintiff failed to meet the initial threshold of establishing that Welsh was exposed to asbestos and had a greater risk of exposure than the general public. {¶ 27} Ford…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 21, 2012 · in the opinion
Campbell v. Ford Motor Company (2012)
…or owed only a limited duty, is to be made on a more general basis suitable to the formulation of a legal rule, in most cases preserving for the jury the fact-specific question of whether…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 15, 2007 · in the opinion
Honer v. Ford Motor Company (2007)
…fibers. Honer then breathed these asbestos fibers because of her direct and indirect contact with her father and brother themselves as well as their clothes, vehicles, tools and general surroundings. In July 2004, Honer alleged, she…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · September 17, 2018 · in the opinion
Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec, LLC (2018)
…and consortium. Id. \[25\] The Green court recognized a narrow exception to the general rule against recovery for premarital injuries in toxic exposure cases, where the injured spouse does not or cannot know of the injury…