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

Search

6 results for “General Electric”

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 26, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)

    …of America, Inc. (Rec. Doc. 739), Foster-Wheeler LLC (Rec. Docs. 693, 726, 730), General Electric Company (Rec. Docs. 702, 705), and ViacomCBS Inc. (Rec. Docs. 727, 729), plaintiffs' respective oppositions to each motion (Rec. Docs…

  2. Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 5, 2009 · in the opinion

    Crowder V AW Chesterton Co. (2009)

    …date the party last parted with possession or control of the product" constituted a substantive law (see, Connecticut General Statute §52-577\[a\]). In Blatz v. Westinehouse Electric Corp., 274 A.D.2d 491 (2nd Dept.…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 17, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …and makes Volkswagen vehicles, asked to be dismissed because Washington courts lacked personal jurisdiction over it. The court found no general jurisdiction, since Volkswagen AG is neither incorporated nor based in Washington. It also found no…

  4. Court case · New York Supreme Court · May 23, 2018

    Chen v. Volkswagen Group of America (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2018)

    …asked to dismiss the case because Texas was a more convenient forum. The court held that it lacked general jurisdiction over Volkswagen and Nissan. It found long-arm jurisdiction proper because Chen's testimony and the…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · May 17, 2017

    Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (2017)

    …where the plaintiff's exposure occurred in Toronto. General jurisdiction was lacking because the defendant was not at home in Washington. Personal Jurisdiction Worksites: Toronto worked with brakes and clutches on Volkswagen vehicles Toronto 1986-1994

  6. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 30, 2013 · in the opinion

    Steiner v. Volkswagen Group OF America, Inc. (2013)

    …fn. 22. As defendants point out, Ledesma referred to the scope of expert cross-examination in general, as set forth in section 721, subdivision (a), and did not address the limits of permissible cross-examination regarding…