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

Search

12 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · April 19, 1982 · in the opinion

    Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1982)

    …Rather, defendants state, the cost "will be borne by the public at large and reflected in a general, across the board increase in premiums to compensate for unanticipated risks." There is some truth in this assertion…

  2. Person · People and organizations

    Vandiver Brown

    …Corporation Director at Johns-Manville Sales Corporation Assistant Secretary at Johns-Manville Secretary at Johns-Manville Products Corporation Board of Trustees General Counsel at Johns-Manville Director of JMSC, JMPC General Counsel and Secretary of JMC…

  3. Company document · JM Knowledge Chronology · April 22, 1976

    R. S. Lamar to W. H. Ashton of Johnson & Johnson on Rubino's Talc Mortality Study (1976)

    …others at J-M, and the letter is filed under "Talc (general)." In Johns-Manville's chronology Johns-Manville's own chronology of what the company knew describes this document as follows: R.S. Lamar (J…

  4. Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · November 21, 1978 · in the opinion

    Harig v. Johns-Manville Products (1978)

    …coupled with the peculiarly harsh consequences of adherence to the general rule of accrual from the date of the "wrong," prompted our predecessors to recognize the discovery principle in determining when a cause of action accrues…

  5. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · September 10, 1973 · in the opinion

    Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation (1973)

    …of the same danger. This inconsistency in the jury's verdicts, although puzzling, need not detain us. It has long been the rule that consistency in general verdicts is not required. Dunn v. United States, 1932…

  6. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit · September 24, 1975 · in the opinion

    Karjala v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1975)

    …Karjala began to feel a shortness of breath, congestion, a loss of appetite, and general weakness. Suspecting that he might have tuberculosis, he had his chest x-rayed. The x-ray showed no evidence of tuberculosis…

  7. Court case · California Supreme Court · July 3, 1980 · in the opinion

    Johns-Manville Products Corp. v. Superior Court (1980)

    …App.2d 451, 458-460 \[70 Cal. Rptr. 710\].) In Ramey v. General Petroleum Corp. (1959) 173 Cal. App.2d 386, 402 \[343 P.2d 787\], it was held that an action for fraud could be…

  8. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · November 30, 1977 · in the opinion

    Bush v. Johns-Manville Products Corporation (1977)

    …298 (1976), construed the 1974 amendment as retroactive in nature because of its beneficent purpose and the general rule of liberally interpreting the Workers' Compensation Act. It also held that such retroactivity did not impair any…

  9. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · June 11, 1984 · in the opinion

    Hansen v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1984)

    …Navy during the Korean conflict and that he was classified as a pipefitter, but that his job was more properly characterized as a general handyman. Most of the pipefitting work was done on shore by others…

  10. Court case · New York Court of Appeals · October 29, 1981 · in the opinion

    Matter of Steinhardt v. JohnsManville Corp. (1981)

    …such claims are diligently and expeditiously pursued. An exception to the general period of limitation rule is required when the pathological effect of an injury occurs without perceptible trauma, and the victim is blamelessly ignorant of…

  11. Court case · Kentucky Supreme Court · April 10, 1979 · in the opinion

    Louisville Trust Co. v. Johns-Manville Products (1979)

    …to run. The rule of Tomlinson is an exception to the general rule with its limitation being limited to malpractice cases.\[5\] The extent of the application of Tomlinson was irrelevant to the decision. It was…

  12. Court case · New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division · January 18, 1979 · in the opinion

    Weinberg v. Johns-Manville Prods. Corp. (1979)

    …situation in which the parties have appeared and entered into opposition by virtue of the pleadings. As a general rule, the relevance of this procedural aspect to the situation where the movant has exclusive knowledge impels…