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

Search

6 results for “Reaction Department”

  1. Court case · New York Supreme Court · January 10, 2013 · in the opinion

    Vega v. Georgia-Pacific, LLC (2013)

    …s exhibit 20 is a 1966 study commissioned by UCC which revealed that rats had a more "severe reaction" to Calidria asbestos that had been mined by UCC in California than asbestos that had been mined…

  2. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania · June 29, 2018 · in the opinion

    Mehnert v. Agilent Technologies, Inc. (2018)

    …and products. (Docket No. 1-1 ¶ 8).\[3\] Plaintiff Harald Mehnert worked on Mass Spectrometers at the U.S. Geological Survey ("U.S.G.S") Department in Denver, Colorado between 1959 and 1995. (Docket No. 1…

  3. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · December 19, 2019 · in the opinion

    Union Carbide Corporation v. Torres (2019)

    …the inhalation of asbestos fibers and the penetration of the fibers through the air sac of the lung. He explained that the body's inflammatory reaction to the fibers causes genetic damage. As the damage accumulates…

  4. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 29, 2007 · in the opinion

    Bakkie v. Union Carbide Corporation (2007)

    …You mix them together. That starts the curing. That starts the chemical reaction for it to solidify. And we know that Mr. Bakkie was around the nitrogen gas that topped off the barrels of OPM because…

  5. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · April 20, 2016

    Seymoure v. AO Smith Water Products Company (2016)

    …s counsel planned to use the records in other litigation, and the order set no limit on that. The court remanded for a protective order requiring redaction and limiting use to this case unless employees consent.

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas · September 29, 2016 · in the opinion

    In re Reed (2016)

    …to depose anyone but herself, wants to preserve only her own testimony about her personal and unique knowledge of her employment involving direct contact with asbestos, her reactions to it, and her medical treatment, in sum…