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

Search

6 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · July 8, 2024

    Constanza v. Sparta Insurance Company (2024)

    Erica Dandry Constanza and Monica Dandry Haller sued Avondale (Huntington Ingalls), Hopeman Brothers and other companies in Louisiana state court. They said Michael P. Dandry, Jr. was exposed to asbestos while working at Avondale for about two and a…

  2. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · May 22, 2019 · in the opinion

    Lamson v. Georgia-Pacific LLC (2019)

    …General Electric ("GE"), denied manufacturing any turbines used at the jobsites, and the estate failed to rebut this assertion. Id. at 575. While GE admitted that a "small percentage" of electrical wires and cables contained a…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · March 4, 2020

    Gaddy v. Taylor Seidenbach, Inc. (2020)

    …a jury found Ethyl, International Paper and Owens-Illinois liable. It awarded $7.5 million in general damages plus $250,661.45 in medical expenses. Judgment against Ethyl was $2,583,553.82, its share after…

  4. Court case · Wisconsin Court of Appeals · September 25, 2001 · in the opinion

    International Paper Co. v. Labour & Indus. Rev. Com'n (2001)

    …9. In this case, neither party specifically addresses whether and to what extent these four factors have been established. Our general review of the case suggests that factors one, three and four are satisfied. Furthermore, it…

  5. Court case · Wisconsin Court of Appeals · July 3, 2012 · in the opinion

    Calewarts v. CR Meyer and Sons Company (2012)

    …85 N.W.2d 772 (1957). As a general rule, an owner "is deemed to have constructive notice of a defect or unsafe condition when that defect or condition has existed a long enough time for…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Oklahoma · July 30, 2014 · in the opinion

    Bootenhoff v. Hormel Foods Corporation (2014)

    …the place of conduct factor does not favor one state over another because the alleged conduct is spread over multiple states. See, e.g, Patten v. General Motors Corp., Chevrolet Motor Div., 699 F. Supp. 1500…