12 results for “General Electric”
-
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 · 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 · 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 · California Court of Appeal · March 26, 2014 · in the opinion
Scott v. Ford Motor Company (2014)
…time employing as many as 17 workers. While operating the service stations, Scott became a member of an automotive trade association and earned certification in electrical systems, engine performance, and advanced engine performance from Automotive Service…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · July 10, 2006
Berger v. Amchem Prods. (2006)
The court denied DaimlerChrysler's motions (joined by Ford and General Motors) to preclude evidence that brake and clutch dust causes asbestos disease, to dismiss the complaints, and for a Frye hearing, so the plaintiffs (Berger…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · August 10, 2018
Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLC (2018)
…a pathologist's tissue analysis, an occupational physician's exposure opinions, a scientist's general testimony on how asbestos causes disease, a historian's account of what was known about asbestos hazards, and studies and videos…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · February 1, 2022 · in the opinion
Labarre v. Bienville Auto Parts Inc. (2022)
…1980s and 1990s) raising the question of Bienville's general knowledge about the dangers of asbestos-containing products.\[63\] Because there is at least some evidence that Bienville knew or should have known that the products…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 2013 · in the opinion
Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer (2013)
…more widely used terminology in Virginia as well as the terminology used by the circuit court in this case. \[3\] Although the General Assembly later established a discovery rule for asbestos-related diseases based on diagnosis…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 14, 2003 · in the opinion
Cossman v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (2003)
…28, 61 Cal.Rptr.2d 518.) Section 361 Requires Application of Indiana Law In general, whether a claim is barred by a statute of limitations "is a procedural matter governed by the law of the forum…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 28, 2019 · in the opinion
Jack v. Dco, LLC (2019)
…both companies. (Id.) C. The Jury's Verdict The court provided the jury a general verdict form on which the jury was asked whether Plaintiffs proved their strict liability design defect, strict liability failure-to-warn…
-
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…