12 results for “General Electric”
-
Court case · Mississippi Supreme Court · December 12, 1990 · in the opinion
Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Edwards (1990)
… 15-1-35, citing the general rule that the statute began to run from the date of publication of the allegedly libelous statement to a third person. Staheli argued that the statute did not begin to…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · July 24, 1979 · in the opinion
Nolan v. Johns-Manville Asbestos & Magnesia Materials Co. (1979)
…defective product. See Urie v. Thompson, 337 U.S. 163, 69 S.Ct. 1018, 11 A.L.R.2d 252; Sylvania Electric Products, Inc. v. Barker, 228 F.2d 842; Brush Beryllium Co. v. Meckley, 284…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit · January 30, 1986 · in the opinion
Lohrmann v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp. (1986)
…a given industry. They are often set forth in some type of code, such as a building code or electrical code, or they may be adopted by the trade organization of a given industry. State of…
-
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, Eastern District of Texas · January 14, 1980 · in the opinion
Mooney v. Fibreboard Corp. (1980)
…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. 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. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · May 1, 1981 · in the opinion
Fusco v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1981)
…1975) is not in point. In Kellum, the court determined that the United States in general was not subject to state statutes of limitations; however, nothing in the opinion indicates that a state statute of limitations…
-
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 · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · September 30, 1999 · in the opinion
Porter Hayden Company v. Wyche (1999)
…to the earliest diagnosis, from adenocarcinoma is 13.2 years." Although Porter Hayden seems to take issue in its reply brief with the use of general epidemiological testimony to draw inferences in specific cases, in Grimshaw…
-
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 · Pennsylvania Superior Court · May 11, 1998 · in the opinion
McCauley v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998)
…wages. \[4\] In Simmons, the supreme court noted a limited exception to the general rule that a plaintiff does not have a viable cause of action for asymptomatic pleural thickening. This exception recognizes that a plaintiff…
-
Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · November 28, 1978 · in the opinion
Daniels v. Combustion Engineering, Inc. (1978)
… and fifth, the legal existence of the first suit. "The general rules above laid down have been held applicable, notwithstanding the fact that one suit is at law and the other in equity. Because a deposition…