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

Search

4 results for “Ford Motor Company”

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan · January 14, 1987 · in the opinion

    Marshall v. Celotex Corp. (1987)

    …defendants should be \jointly and severally' liable." (Plaintiff's Complaint at pp. 7-8). A case decided in the Michigan Court of Appeals subsequent to Abel is Cousineau v. Ford Motor Company, 140 Mich.App. 19…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan · May 12, 1987 · in the opinion

    Marshall v. Celotex Corp. (1987)

    …by demonstrating defendants' concerted activity, and proximate cause, by demonstrating that defendants' conduct "was so significant and important a cause that \[defendants\] should be legally responsible." Cousineau v. Ford Motor Company, 140 Mich.App. 19, 35…

  3. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · June 25, 1982 · in the opinion

    Froud v. Celotex Corporation (1982)

    …as indicated by the recent single personal injury jury verdict in the amount of $127.8 million, of which $125 million was for punitive damages. (Richard Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co., Superior Court, Santa Ana, Cal.…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan · August 18, 1988 · in the opinion

    Marshall v. Celotex Corp. (1988)

    …Abel v. Eli Lilly & Co., 418 Mich. 311, 343 N.W.2d 164 (1984), and Cousineau v. Ford Motor Co., 140 Mich.App. 19, 363 N.W.2d 721 (1985), cert. denied sub nom. Firestone Tire…