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

Search

14 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · November 22, 1999

    Miller v. Foster Wheeler Co. (1999)

    Creighton Miller, as administrator of the estates of seamen William Blecker and Willie Holmes, sued a large group of manufacturers and shipping companies. Blecker was diagnosed with mesothelioma in August 1989 and died in October 1992. Holmes was…

  2. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · March 21, 1996 · in the opinion

    Holbrook v. Lykes Bros. SS Co., Inc. (1996)

    …BABCOCK & WILCOX COMPANY; Combustion Engineering, Inc.; Foster-Wheeler Energy Corporation; The General Electric Co.; Keene Corporation, Independently and as Successor in Interest to Ehret Magnesia Manufacturing Company, Baldwin-Hill Company and Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc.; Owens…

  3. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit · June 14, 1990

    Fagiola v. National Gypsum Co. AC & S., Inc. (1990)

    …not warrant reversal. Product Identification; Trial Procedure and Discovery Worksites: Electric Boat shipyard (General Dynamics); General Dynamics Electric Boat Shipyard, Groton quality assurance engineer General Dynamics Electric Boat Shipyard Groton late 1950's and 1960's

  4. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · March 25, 2003 · in the opinion

    AlliedSignal, Inc. v. Herring (2003)

    …Tennant Co., United States Gypsum Co., United States Mineral Products Co., Wagner Electric Co., Appellants (Defendants below), v. Lucille HERRING, on her own behalf and on behalf of the Estate of Loyd Herring, Deceased., Appellee (Plaintiff…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · December 11, 1990 · in the opinion

    Knox v. AC & S, Inc. (1990)

    …Code sections 22-3-7-2 through XX-X-X-XX as the IWODA despite the fact that the Indiana General Assembly repealed the Act's short title in 1988. \[5\] The employer's exemption from…

  6. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit · August 13, 1982 · in the opinion

    Neubauer v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1982)

    …to his health. We thus regard Wisconsin Natural Gas to be an exceptional application of the more general rule that the cause of action accrues when the asbestos-caused disease becomes diagnosable — e.g., provable by…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Iowa · November 22, 1994 · in the opinion

    Perrin v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1994)

    …that the defendants' products were located at shipyards where the Parks was overhauled, and were used by shipyard workers on ships in general, does not support a reasonable inference that the plaintiff was exposed to asbestos…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana · June 23, 1999 · in the opinion

    Lambert v. Babcock & Wilcox Co. (1999)

    …we must address two issues. First, we must assess the general features of the type of incident involved to determine whether the incident had "a potentially disruptive impact on maritime commerce." Id. (quoting Sisson v. Ruby…

  9. Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · April 28, 1997 · in the opinion

    Mavroudis v. Pittsburgh-Corning Corp. (1997)

    …evidence or the supposed inadequacies therein, with the single exception of one general objection based on hearsay contained in the declarations of counsel [\693] provided for use at the reasonableness hearing. Even that objection is not…

  10. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · November 18, 1994 · in the opinion

    Keystone Steel and Wire Co. v. Costa (1994)

    …689, 485 N.E.2d 500.) In general, a new trial on the question of damages only is appropriately granted where (1) the jury's verdict on the question of liability is amply supported by the…

  11. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · December 27, 1995 · in the opinion

    Hefner v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1995)

    …suit was filed. While the county where the injury occurred generally has a strong interest in the outcome of litigation, this general rule does not necessarily apply to cases involving complex products liability issues. (See Mowen…

  12. Court case · Minnesota Court of Appeals · April 6, 1999 · in the opinion

    Tester v. American Standard, Inc. (1999)

    …604.02, subd. 3 (1998), provides an exception to this general rule and allows an at-fault plaintiff to recover from a less-at-fault defendant in products liability cases. Section 604.02, subdivision 3, provides…

  13. 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…

  14. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit · August 8, 1991 · in the opinion

    Kulzer v. Pittsburgh-Corning Corp. (1991)

    …On appeal from the judgment subsequently entered, OCF offers four general challenges: (1) the district court erred in denying its initial motion for a directed verdict and later motion to dismiss the complaint; (2) the district…