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

Search

11 results for “Owens-Illinois”

  1. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · January 29, 1998

    Adams v. Owens-Illinois (1998)

    Nine asbestos cases, brought by workers or their estates and families, were tried together in Baltimore City against many companies. The claimed diseases were laryngeal, lung and colon cancer, asbestosis, and mesothelioma. One claim was by Mary…

  2. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · February 1, 2010

    Crane v. Linkus (2010)

    George Linkus, a Baltimore shipyard machinist, was diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma in 2005 and sued John Crane, Inc. and others. He had worked at the Key Highway shipyard from 1952 to 1959, overhauling valves and packing them with dry, powdery…

  3. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit · April 13, 1989

    Kaiser v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (1989)

    Sol Kaiser, a Navy veteran, and his wife and children sued several asbestos manufacturers in federal court in Puerto Rico for harm from his asbestos exposure. Kaiser served from 1948 to 1952, repairing insulated pipes on destroyers, where he cut and…

  4. Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 4, 2015

    Brady v. Crane Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2015)

    Plaintiffs asked the New York County Supreme Court to consolidate thirteen asbestos cases for joint trial in two groups. All but one of the plaintiffs had lung cancer. Miceli and Ward had mesothelioma. Most had died, and Miller and Morgan were…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · July 11, 2022 · in the opinion

    Shelton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2022)

    …a showing that plaintiff's "particular asbestos disease is cumulative in nature" which can be satisfied by establishing that "a series of exposures was a \legal cause' of \[plaintiff's\] injury." Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.…

  6. Court case · New York Supreme Court · May 2, 2011

    Conti v. Crane Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig., 2011)

    Eight plaintiffs, each of whom had or has lung cancer or mesothelioma from asbestos exposure, asked the New York County Supreme Court to try their cases together. All but one, David Giancarlo, had died. They named defendants including Crane Co. and…

  7. Court case · New York Supreme Court · December 22, 2011 · in the opinion

    Auletta v. Crane Co (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation Cluster, 2011)

    …contractors' defenses. This is an area of law that is still developing and is unique to this group of cases. See: Feidt v, Owens Corning Fibergalss Corp., 153 F3d 124 (3rd Cir. 1998). It will require…

  8. Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 28, 2008 · in the opinion

    McCann v. Foster Wheeler (2008)

    …law, McCann's claim did not accrue until he was diagnosed with mesothelioma and is not barred by the lapse of time. (See Buttram v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 520, 531, fn…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · April 24, 2023 · in the opinion

    Hutchins v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (2023)

    …When there are multiple causes of injury, "a defendant's conduct is a cause in fact if it is a substantial factor generating plaintiff's harm." Adams v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 923 So. 2d 118…

  10. Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 18, 2021 · in the opinion

    Kriz v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2021)

    In opposition to Armstrong's motion, Plaintiff argues that a product manufacturer like Armstrong owes innocent persons injured from its defective product, like decedent, a clear duty to warn under New York law, especially in "take…

  11. Court case · Florida District Court of Appeal · June 20, 2018 · in the opinion

    Bechtel Corporation v. Batchelor (2018)

    …possession and control of all or part of the plant such that it owed Mr. Batchelor the same duty that a landowner owes an invitee under the law of premises liability. For the reasons explained below…