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

Search

13 results for “Owens-Corning Fiberglas”

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · April 22, 2021 · in the opinion

    Roy v. Colgate Palmolive Co. (2021)

    …Young v. Louge, 660 So. 2d 32, 49 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1995). \[28\] Adams v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 923 So. 2d 118, 123 (La. App. 1 Cir. 2005); See also Pitman v. Crane Co…

  2. Court case · New York Supreme Court · May 28, 2019 · in the opinion

    Olson v. Brenntag N. AM. Inc. (2019)

    …rely on Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v Ballard (749 So 2d 483 \[Fla 1999\]), in which the Florida Supreme Court affirmed a punitive-damages award based in part on post-injury statements by Owens-Corning and…

  3. Court case · California Court of Appeal · September 21, 2021 · in the opinion

    Ann Strobel v. Johnson & Johnson (2021)

    …25 Cal.4th at p. 850), which here is the preponderance of the evidence (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953, 965 (Rutherford)). "\On appeal "\[w\]e review a grant of summary judgment…

  4. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · February 1, 2023 · in the opinion

    Chenet v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. (2023)

    …Judge. APPEAL DISMISSED; CASE REMANDED. Lindsey A. Cheek, THE CHEEK LAW FIRM, 650 Poydras Street, Suite 2310, New Orleans, LA 70130, Lewis Owens Unglesby, Lance C. Unglesby, Adrian M. Simm, Jr., Jamie F. Gontarek, UNGLESBY LAW…

  5. Court case · California Court of Appeal · December 23, 2022 · in the opinion

    Bader v. Johnson & Johnson (2022)

    …with negligence, product liability, and concealment instructions that incorporated the asbestos-specific standard of proof for causation set forth in Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953 \[67 Cal.Rptr.2d 16, 941…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of New York · April 29, 2020 · in the opinion

    Castro v. Colgate-Palmolive Company (2020)

    …2) (B) only when the plaintiff contests, or the court questions, the defendant's allegation." Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, 574 U.S. 81, 89 (2014). Johnson & Johnson thus has satisfied the removal…

  7. Court case · California Court of Appeal · August 5, 2021 · in the opinion

    Leavitt v. Johnson & Johnson (2021)

    …prejudicial error and affirm. BACKGROUND A. A plaintiff seeking to hold a manufacturer liable for asbestos-related latent injuries must satisfy a two-part causation test. (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953…

  8. Court case · Missouri Court of Appeals · June 23, 2020 · in the opinion

    Ingham v. Johnson & Johnson (2020)

    …is reversed in part on the claims of the two Non-Resident Plaintiffs, Allan Koman on behalf of Annette Koman and Marcia Owens, who only used Johnson's Baby Powder and denied using Shimmer for lack…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · July 16, 2019 · in the opinion

    Shook v. Avon Products, Inc. (2019)

    …litigation. See J&J Memorandum in Support of Motion to Fix Venue, ECF No. 1-5 at 17 ("Debtors claim that J&J owes them a duty to defend." (citing 1989 Agreement § 11 & 2011 Agreement ¶ 6))…

  10. Court case · New York Supreme Court · July 31, 2018 · in the opinion

    Crozier v. Johnson & Johnson (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2018)

    …expects or should reasonably expect the act to have consequences in the state and derives substantial revenue from interstate or international commerce; or (4) owns, uses or possesses any real property situated within the state" (CPLR …

  11. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · February 25, 2019 · in the opinion

    Smith v. Avon Products, Inc. (2019)

    …determining whether a subsidiary corporation is a "mere instrumentality" of the parent corporation: (a) The parent corporation owns all or most of the capital stock of the subsidiary. (b) The parent and subsidiary corporations have common…

  12. Court case · New York Supreme Court · July 12, 2019 · in the opinion

    English v. Johnson & Johnson (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2019)

    …should reasonably expect the act to have consequences in the state and derives substantial revenue from interstate or international commerce; or (4) owns or possesses any real property situated within the state (CPLR § 302\[a\]\[1\]…

  13. Court case · New York Supreme Court · October 20, 2020 · in the opinion

    English v. Avon Prods., Inc. (2020)

    …reasonably expect the act to have consequences in the state and derives substantial revenue from interstate or international commerce; or (4) owns or possesses any real property situated within the state. In the case at bar…