7 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · December 23, 1981 · in the opinion
Petes v. Hayes (1981)
…was phrased "Does plaintiff, Alton Petes, suffer from disability or disease which specifically results from the inhalation of asbestos particles ..." (Emphasis added.) "Specifically" was not defined in the general charge. In its everyday usage, "specifically" is…
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · October 4, 2011
Robertson v. Doug Ashy Building Materials, Inc. (2011)
…at issue, and circumstantial evidence that a manufacturer bought the supplier's asbestos can create a fact question on exposure. A raw-asbestos supplier also owes the general duty of reasonable care. Causation; Product Identification; Expert…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · July 7, 1993 · in the opinion
Behrendt v. GAF Corp. (1993)
…fishing, woodworking. Mr. Behrendt's pain symptoms eventually led to a diagnosis of mesothelioma in December 1990. He was taken to the Emergency Room at Community General Osteopathic Hospital, Harrisburg, on December 23, 1990 with a…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania · May 7, 1992 · in the opinion
Sealover v. Carey Canada (1992)
…112 S.Ct. 1671, 118 L.Ed.2d 391 (New Rule 238 withstands constitutional challenges on due process and equal protection grounds.); Leonard v. General Motors Corp., Civil No. 88-2380, slip op. at 5 (E…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Kansas · May 2, 1991 · in the opinion
Harding v. Proko Industries, Inc. (1991)
…find Kansas or Texas law to be applicable to the plaintiff's claims. Section 6(2) of the Second Restatement identifies seven general considerations which are relevant to the resolution of a given conflict of laws…
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · December 13, 2014 · in the opinion
Robertson v. Doug Ashy Building Materials, Inc. (2014)
…to the trial court, Dr. Mark's testimony simply "does not carry the day" because it is of a general nature, and because plaintiffs did not have any evidence of specific causation, the court could not…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of New York · August 15, 2012 · in the opinion
Garner v. Ngc Bodily Injury Trust (2012)
…injuries did not manifest within three years of exposure, and thus, would have otherwise been barred. See Jensen v. General Elec. Co., 82 N.Y.2d 77, 84 (1993). The statute provides: the three year period…