Search

• Organization: Johns-Manville Sales Corp. ×
• Clear filters

15 results for “General Electric”

1. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit · March 30, 1983 · in the opinion

   Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc. (1983)

   …appears that the tests are the same, since, in general "\[o\]nce admiralty jurisdiction is established, then all of the substantive rules and precepts peculiar to the law of the sea become applicable." Brance v. Shumann…

2. Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York · March 15, 1989 · in the opinion

   In re Johns-Manville Corp. (1989)

   …Thus, pursuant to ¶ 10.1(B) of the Plan and the general power of this Court, the Court retains jurisdiction to determine the instant dispute. The Plan also provides in ¶ 10.1(G) that the Court…

3. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · September 22, 1987

   In re Asbestos Litigation (1987)

   Asbestos manufacturers defending personal injury suits in the federal district court in New Jersey challenged a New Jersey Supreme Court rule. Under Beshada and later cases, asbestos defendants could not use the "state-of-the-art" defense, which…

4. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota · January 11, 1982 · in the opinion

   Bertrand v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)

   …discretion to determine when it should be applied. The general rule should be that in cases where a plaintiff could easily have joined in the earlier action or where, either for the reasons discussed above or…

5. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · April 27, 1990 · in the opinion

   Jenkins v. Johns-Manville Products (1990)

   …BROCHIN. Lawrence G. Moncher, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent-appellant Commissioner Of Labor, and respondent-cross-appellant in A-5659-86T7 (Robert J. Del Tufo, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney; Lawrence G…

6. Court case · Ohio Supreme Court · October 14, 1987 · in the opinion

   Goldman v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1987)

   …it is important to understand that both alternative liability and market-share liability are exceptions to the general rule that a plaintiff has to prove an injury was caused by the negligence of a particular defendant…

7. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · March 23, 1984 · in the opinion

   Adams v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1984)

   …a "less desirable longshoreman" in the future. Id. at 668. Bonura is inapposite to the case at bar. Bonura was decided under general maritime law, not Louisiana law. Furthermore, the instant record does not support an…

8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas · March 1, 1983 · in the opinion

   Carter v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1983)

   …been even reasonably knowable. The supplier would thus be free of culpability, but a price of his doing business is to protect people from danger from his products — or to pay. General Motors Corp. v. Hopkins…

9. Court case · Pennsylvania Supreme Court · January 27, 1984 · in the opinion

   Doe v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1984)

   …June 27, 1978 is broad in its scope and is to be liberally construed,\[3\] but is not without its limitations. In its general provision it states: Courts of record, within their respective jurisdictions, shall have…

10. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit · July 30, 1982 · in the opinion

    Wilson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1982)

    …first action may expressly reserve plaintiff's right to maintain second action). \[35\] Johns-Manville has catalogued an impressive array of court decisions exemplifying the general res judicata rule against splitting an indivisible cause of action…

11. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit · April 7, 1981 · in the opinion

    Clutter v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981)

    …does not apply to cases already filed before the amendment was enacted. Section 28 of the Ohio Constitution states that the "general assembly shall have no power to pass retroactive laws, ..." Section 1.58(A)(1…

12. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Mississippi · November 21, 1980 · in the opinion

    McCarty v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1980)

    …1969) the Court stated: "Because this is a diversity case, the law of the state where the district court sat controls questions [\339] of res judicata and estoppel. See also Aerojet-General Aviation Corp. v. Askew…

13. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit · December 7, 1983 · in the opinion

    Clay v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1983)

    …other issues remaining in relation to defendant Raybestos-Manhattan, the first issue pertains to the judge's instruction to the jury on the possible effect of a general 10-year statute of limitations, T.C.A…

14. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · September 16, 1983 · in the opinion

    Thompson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1983)

    …Thompson can advance in support of his claim that Louisiana would adopt either if presented his case is a supposed general tendency or trend on the part of Louisiana courts to expand the liability of manufacturers…

15. Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · November 28, 1978 · in the opinion

    Daniels v. Combustion Engineering, Inc. (1978)

    … and fifth, the legal existence of the first suit. "The general rules above laid down have been held applicable, notwithstanding the fact that one suit is at law and the other in equity. Because a deposition…