327 results for “General Electric”, page 13 of 17
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · August 30, 2024 · in the opinion
Brooks v. Mission Stucco Company (2024)
…4th 413, 424 (Wysinger).) However, "\[w\]ith a special verdict, unlike a general verdict or a general verdict with special findings, a reviewing court will not infer findings to support the verdict." (Singh, at p. 358…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana · February 12, 2025 · in the opinion
Alford v. Taylor-Seidenbach, Inc. (2025)
…Supreme Court in Halphen v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. ("Halphen I"): There is general agreement upon the most basic principles of strict tort products liability. In order to recover from a manufacturer, the plaintiff must prove…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Kentucky · December 9, 2020 · in the opinion
Papineau v. Brake Supply Company, Inc. (2020)
…Topic 2 is overly broad and confusing because it makes a general request for "\[t\]he contents of all documents and declarations submitted by or on behalf of Fras-le SA in connection with this matter…
-
Court case · Delaware Supreme Court · March 24, 2020 · in the opinion
Shaw v. American Friction (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2020)
…is the proper standard under Delaware law, and the General Scheduling Order expressly requires a "showing of good cause" to modify the scheduling order.\[28\] To assess good cause, as the Special Master and Superior Court…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 2013 · in the opinion
Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer (2013)
…more widely used terminology in Virginia as well as the terminology used by the circuit court in this case. \[3\] Although the General Assembly later established a discovery rule for asbestos-related diseases based on diagnosis…
-
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…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · July 10, 2007 · in the opinion
IN Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation (2007)
…NY2d 955 \[1997\]), which held that general awareness of the risk of injury to persons exposed to asbestos without the opportunity to warn was insufficient to establish recklessness. Defendant argues that the same rule applies to…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 4, 2012 · in the opinion
Bettencourt v. Hennessy Industries, Inc. (2012)
…plaintiffs' injuries. I. Standard of Review A motion for judgment on the pleadings is analogous to a general demurrer. (Ludgate, supra, 82 Cal.App.4th at p. 602.) Like a general demurrer, it tests the sufficiency…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 30, 2010 · in the opinion
Russell v. Ford Motor Company (2010)
…if not all, of the cars he worked on were made by Ford, General Motors or Chrysler. As part of his duties, he used an air compressor to blow the dirt off the outside of the…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · September 27, 2021 · in the opinion
Walls v. Ford Motor Company (2021)
…as already mentioned, Rule 26 provides two exceptions to the general rule that a party may not obtain discovery from another party's consulting expert: "(i) as provided in Rule 35(b); or (ii) on showing…
-
Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · May 11, 2018 · in the opinion
Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Coates (2018)
…PROCEEDINGS Until it closed in 1989, Marcantoni was a Baltimore-based general construction contracting company that specialized in highway and utility work for local governments in the greater Baltimore area. Its headquarters was located on Broening…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · February 25, 2022 · in the opinion
Walls v. Ford Motor Company (2022)
…the direct and circumstantial evidence discussed herein — including general causation expert testimony to which ZF has not objected — is sufficient on its own to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Strick's…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina · December 6, 2021 · in the opinion
Settlemyer v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec, LLC (2021)
…October 14, 2020, Dr. Staggs sets forth the general principles of asbestos-related disease; discusses the studies and reports identifying a causal relationship between asbestos-containing products and diseases such as asbestosis, lung cancer, and mesothelioma…
-
Court case · New York Court of Appeals · November 27, 2018 · in the opinion
Juni v. Ford Motor Co. (Matter of New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2018)
…evidence, a connection between defendant Ford Motor Company's products and decedent's exposure to asbestos. I do not address any other issues of general or specific causation reached by the Appellate Division. [\1119] Wilson, J…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · May 17, 2013 · in the opinion
Finerty v. Abex Corp. (2013)
…if proven, would be sufficient to demonstrate that the exercise of personal jurisdiction would be proper under either New York's general jurisdiction statute (CPLR 301) or New York's long-arm statute (CPLR 302), and…
-
Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · October 16, 2006 · in the opinion
McPhee v. Ford Motor Company (2006)
…s mesothelioma: \[Ms. Leeper\]: Will you be offering any specific opinions at trial regarding the causal relationship between Ms. McPhee's alleged indirect exposure to General Motors or Ford asbestos-containing products and her alleged mesothelioma? . …
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio · April 23, 2020 · in the opinion
Parker Hannifin Corp. v. Standard Motor Products, Inc. (2020)
…not, the Court finds that an interlocutory appeal cannot be said to materially affect the outcome of the instant case. See e.g., In re General Motors LLC, 2019 WL 8403402 at [\1] (6th Cir. Sept…
-
Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · June 2, 2017 · in the opinion
Landreth v. Brake Supply Company, Inc. (2017)
…however, must be reasonable, that is they must "indicate the probable, as distinguished from a possible cause." Briner v. General Motors Corporation, Ky., 461 S.W.2d 99, 101 (1970). Id. at 872-73. More recently…
-
Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · June 28, 2019 · in the opinion
Blakely v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (2019)
…Rubber & Supply Co., 117 Ohio App. 12 (7th Dist.1961). {¶31} "\[W\]hen the Ohio General Assembly enacted the current version of the \[Ohio Products Liability Act, R.C. 2307.71 et seq.\], it abrogated all…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 26, 2021 · in the opinion
Toy v. Honeywell Int'l (In re Asbestos, 2021)
…reliability, the Court "assess\[es\] the \[expert's\] reasoning or methodology, using as appropriate such criteria as testability, publication in peer reviewed literature, and general acceptance." Id. at 564. III. DISCUSSION Defendant argues that Dr. Brodkin…