202 results for “Owens-Corning Fiberglas”, page 10 of 11
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · June 3, 2014
Haver v. BNSF Railway Co. (2014)
…Ford Motor Co., a premises owner owes no duty of care to family members of workers who are secondarily exposed to asbestos off the premises, whether the worker was employed by the owner or by a…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 4, 2011
Belvedere v. GS Blodgett Corporation (2011)
…November 2007, and Noella and the couple's three children then filed wrongful death and survival claims. The plaintiffs said he worked around Blodgett pizza ovens from 1959 on. They did not name G.S. Blodgett…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 26, 1998
Gutierrez v. Cassiar Mining Corp. (1998)
…called for much of the monitoring. The trial court refused Cassiar's requested jury instruction saying a defendant owes only for monitoring additional to or different from what those conditions require. The Court of Appeal held…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · April 4, 2016
Flintkote Company v. Aviva Plc (2016)
The court granted Aviva's motion for partial summary judgment (California law applies and Aviva owes only the trust payment percentage), denied Flintkote's motion for a declaration that Aviva must pay full liquidated value, and…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · April 8, 2016
Flintkote Co. v. Aviva Plc (2016)
The court granted Aviva's motion for partial summary judgment, holding Aviva owes Flintkote only the trust payment percentage rather than the full liquidated value of claims, denied Flintkote's motion for a declaration, and granted…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 20, 2021
Khosravan v. Exxon Mobil Corp. (2021)
…defendants, holding they owed no duty of care to Khosravan, and awarded respondents their costs on appeal. A defendant owes no duty to protect workers from asbestos at premises it did not own, possess or control…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 14, 2019
Malek v. Chevron U.S.A. (In re Laosd Asbestos Cases, 2019)
…was not a joint venturer or principal of the operator, and did not undertake responsibility for worker safety owes no duty of care; workers who only incidentally benefit from a contract are not intended third party…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 28, 2020
Sabetian v. Exxon Mobil Corp. (2020)
…favor of the Exxon defendants. A defendant that did not own, possess or control the premises owes no premises or negligence duty to workers there, and a guarantee in a contract not intended to benefit the…
-
Court case · U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of California · November 21, 2016 · in the opinion
In re Cfb Liquidating Corporation (2016)
…to the trust fund received from other primary insurers; c) Continental owes no recovery to the Trust with respect to any Trust Claim absent an allocated percentage proposed to Continental; d) The Trustee did not comply…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 6, 2014 · in the opinion
Ward v. Goss-Jewett Co. OF Northern California (2014)
…Secretary of State and its agent for service of process is Stephen Lamanet. Lamanet is the son of the original owner of Goss-Jewett and currently owns 51 percent of the company. On May 24, 2012…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · December 9, 2020 · in the opinion
Hart v. Keenan Properties, Inc. (2020)
…at p. 551 \["any reasonable charges for treatment the injured person has paid or, having incurred, still owes the medical provider are recoverable as economic damages"\].) As explained in Pebley v. Santa Clara Organics, LLC, supra…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 16, 2003 · in the opinion
Dekens v. Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (2003)
…cognizance of Food and Drug Administration regulations concerning proper levels of lead in paint for toys. Similar dependence is placed on the Bureau of Radiological Health for permissible radiation levels from products such as microwave ovens, \[…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 16, 2018 · in the opinion
Wittman v. Coty, Inc. (2018)
…that a particular exposure or series of exposures was a \legal cause' of his injury, i.e., a substantial factor in bringing about the injury." (Rutherford v. Owen-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953, 982…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 29, 2010 · in the opinion
McCann v. Foster Wheller, LLC (2010)
…status and location of the property is also a significant factor. If the property is owned by the same entity that owns the real property, this suggests that the property may be an improvement to real…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 18, 2003 · in the opinion
Kinsman v. Unocal Corp. (2003)
…to protect themselves against it, and \[¶\] (c) fails to exercise reasonable care to protect them against the danger." Thus, a landowner owes a duty to invitees to exercise reasonable care in maintaining the premises. (§ 343; see […
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 15, 2018 · in the opinion
Polar-Mohr Maschinenvertriebsgesellschaft Gmbh, Co. KG v. Zurich American Insurance Company (2018)
…the policy period, including death at any time resulting therefrom." Id. at ZUR002026. Zurich also owes the policyholder a duty to defend, with defense costs covered in addition to the policy's limits. Id. at ZUR002027…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · August 11, 2015 · in the opinion
Murat v. Exxon Mobil Corp. (2015)
…1987) 845 F.2d 536, 541.) A vessel owner owes three duties of care to a ship repair contractor, commonly referred to as the "\"turnover duty," dealing with the condition of the ship when the owner…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 30, 2009 · in the opinion
Short v. Sequoia Ventures, Inc. (2009)
…and accepted" doctrine, under which a builder or designer of a real property improvement owes no duty to a third party injured by a patent defect after the owner accepts the completed improvement. (See Jones v…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 19, 2018 · in the opinion
Hubbard v. California Water Service Company (2018)
…explained in a footnote that it was using the term "landowner" to refer "to either an owner or a possessor of land that owes some kind of duty of care to keep the premises safe." (Kinsman…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 21, 2012 · in the opinion
Campbell v. Ford Motor Company (2012)
…harm. "A person that owns property is negligent if he or she fails to use reasonable care to keep the property in a reasonably safe condition. A person that owns property must use reasonable care to…