14 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 2, 2018
Matter of Crozier v. Avon Prods., Inc. (2018)
…Avon's powder. They moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction or on forum non conveniens grounds. The court found no general jurisdiction, since neither company was incorporated or based in New York. It found…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · July 27, 2018
Brewer v. Avon Prods., Inc. (2018)
…jurisdiction and on forum non conveniens grounds, arguing that everything happened in Minnesota. The court found no general jurisdiction, since neither company was incorporated or based in New York. It did find specific jurisdiction under New…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · December 3, 2018
Hooper-Lynch v. Imerys Talc America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2018)
…New York, transacts business here with an articulable nexus to the claim, supporting specific jurisdiction under CPLR 302(a)(1) even though there is no general jurisdiction. Personal Jurisdiction user of cosmetic talc powder 1968-1985
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 6, 2018
Black v. Imerys Talc America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2018)
…and Cyprus Amax Minerals, moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and on forum non conveniens grounds. The court found no general jurisdiction, because both companies are incorporated and based elsewhere. It found specific jurisdiction…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · December 4, 2018
Shulman v. Imerys Talc America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2018)
…as to Imerys. Imerys is a Delaware corporation based in California, so New York had no general jurisdiction over it. The court nonetheless found specific jurisdiction under New York's long-arm statute. In interrogatory answers…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · February 26, 2019
Shanahan v. Kolmar Laboratories, Inc. (2019)
…non-diverse defendant in state court; under New York's lenient pleading standard, general allegations of manufacture and a disputed contract-specifications defense did not meet that burden. Venue, Removal and Transfer; Trial Procedure and Discovery
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · April 28, 2021 · in the opinion
Lanzo v. Cyprus Amax Minerals Company (2021)
…Ibid. It held that, because the defendants had general knowledge of the rollover problem, they "had notice of potential relevance to this and other litigation involving their product." Ibid. Because the evidence of destruction of raw…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · August 25, 2017 · in the opinion
Alfaro v. Imerys Talc America Inc. (2017)
…Fitzgerald's opinion was based on the excluded testing, and therefore was also inadmissible. However, the court found Fitzgerald could give the general opinion that the product was "friable. . . that when dispersed it can be inhaled…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 22, 2020 · in the opinion
Gibbons v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer (Laosd Asbestos Cases, 2020)
…and loss of consortium based on asbestos exposure. Appellants sought general and punitive damages against two groups of defendants: those that allegedly exposed Mrs. Gibbons and her family to asbestos through construction work\[2\] and the…
-
Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Western District of Oklahoma · June 21, 2019 · in the opinion
In re Imerys Talc America, Inc. (2019)
…One problem with this argument is that while J & J makes general statements that the indemnification agreements and shared policies are applicable it has not produced any admissible evidence pointing to specific language in the indemnification…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · December 11, 2020 · in the opinion
Booker v. Imerys Talc America, Inc. (2020)
…although Dr. Longo offered specific opinions only about Vanderbilt's talc products, his general testimony about asbestos—including the properties of asbestos, the definition of an asbestiform fiber, and the best method for detecting asbestos—was…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · June 19, 2019 · in the opinion
Peralta v. Cyprus Amax Minerals Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2019)
…to form CAMC. CAMC moved to dismiss for lack of general or specific personal jurisdiction. This Court held that general jurisdiction could not be exercised over CAMC because it was not incorporated nor had its principal…
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · February 1, 2023 · in the opinion
Chenet v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. (2023)
…misplaced. Unlike in Thomas, the trial court judge made only a general statement regarding potential appellate court reversal —the trial court commented that this court had reversed his prior decisions in other unrelated cases. Likewise, the…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of New York · July 31, 2019 · in the opinion
LaFLAIR v. Johnson & Johnson (2019)
…thus requiring the Court to interpret each allegation as against Kolmar individually. While these "general allegation\[s\] would arguably be insufficient under federal pleading standards, the question at this stage is whether Plaintiff\['s\] pleadings are…