11 results for “General Electric”
-
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…Code sections 22-3-7-2 through XX-X-X-XX as the IWODA despite the fact that the Indiana General Assembly repealed the Act's short title in 1988.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…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · February 28, 1986 · in the opinion
Joyce v. AC and S., Inc. (1986)
No ordinary disease of life to which the general public is exposed outside of the employment shall be compensable, except: (1) When it follows as an incident of occupational disease as defined in this title; or…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York · January 21, 1994 · in the opinion
Tabolt v. Flintkote Co. (In re New York Asbestos Litigation, 1994)
…at 982 F.2d 721 (2d Cir.1992), and the publication of numerous stories in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal — any well-informed citizen could possess general knowledge about Johns Manville, c.f.…
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Columbia · October 28, 1981 · in the opinion
Fearson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981)
…The defendants' first argument is that plaintiff's "survival" claim is time-barred under the law of the District of Columbia, which provides that the general period of limitations is three years. See D.C.Code …
-
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…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit · August 28, 1995 · in the opinion
Consorti v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (1995)
…s fees to fight asbestos litigation cases." The district court ruled that any well-informed citizen could possess general knowledge about Johns-Manville and that the report from the juror was not prejudicial to the defendants…
-
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…
-
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…
-
Court case · Ohio Court of Common Pleas · January 12, 1987 · in the opinion
Lavelle v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1987)
…developing cancer in the future. Ohio courts have not specifically addressed the issue presented here but the general policy of this state has been to permit recovery for reasonable apprehension of a potential harm flowing from…