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

Search

49 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 2 of 3

  1. Court case · Delaware Superior Court · September 28, 2020 · in the opinion

    Gibbs v. 84 Lumber Company (2020)

    …238, 242 (4th Cir. 1971) (finding that the duty-to-warn arises when the user may not realize the potential danger of a product))); see Watson v. Ford Motor Co., 389 S.C. 434, 444, 699…

  2. Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 21, 2016 · in the opinion

    Casey v. Kaiser Gypsum Co. Inc. (2016)

    …701.) Accordingly, we conclude excluding reference to the first jury's determination that Kaiser Gypsum was 3.5 percent at fault did not prejudice Kaiser Gypsum. White v. Ford Motor Co. (9th Cir. 2007) 500 F…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · February 16, 2011 · in the opinion

    Anderson v. Salmon Bay and Gravel Co. (In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, 2011)

    …Schiff, 602 F.3d 152, 172 (3d Cir. April 7, 2010) (quoting Pineda v. Ford Motor Co., 502 F.3d 237, 243-44 (3d Cir. 2008)). Defendant has not challenged the qualification of Plaintiffs' experts, so…

  4. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · May 9, 2017 · in the opinion

    Startley v. Welco Mfg. Co. (2017)

    …Appeals recently decided a case in which a brake worker had inhaled asbestos dust from installing the brake products of six different manufacturers. Vaughn v. Ford Motor Co., 91 S.W.3d 387, 393 (Tex.App…

  5. Court case · Texas Supreme Court · July 11, 2014 · in the opinion

    Bostic v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. (2014)

    …1965). \[44\] RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF TORTS: LIABILITY FOR PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL HARM § 26 (2010). \[45\] See id. § 26 cmt. j. \[46\] 232 S.W.3d at 772. \[47\] Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer, 285 Va. 141…

  6. Court case · Missouri Court of Appeals · June 19, 2012 · in the opinion

    Wagner v. Bondex International, Inc. (2012)

    …Montgomery, 331 S.W.3d at 335. "Whether the plaintiff made a submissible case is a question of law subject to de novo review." Moore v. Ford Motor Co., 332 S.W.3d 749, 756 (Mo…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of North Dakota · March 28, 1990 · in the opinion

    Puppe By Puppe v. AC and S., Inc. (1990)

    …955 (N.D.Tex. 1978) ($10 million punitive damage award overturned by court); Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co., 119 Cal.App.3d 757, 174 Cal.Rptr. 348 (1981) (upheld trial court's reduction in punitive damage…

  8. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 22, 2014 · in the opinion

    Izell v. Union Carbide Corp. (2014)

    …Cal.App.4th 655, 690-691 \[71 Cal.Rptr.3d 775\].) As our Supreme Court stated in Johnson v. Ford Motor Co. (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1191 \[29 Cal.Rptr.3d 401, 113 P.3d 82…

  9. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 21, 2014 · in the opinion

    Izell v. Union Carbide Corporation (2014)

    …(2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 655, 690-691.) As our Supreme Court stated in Johnson v. Ford Motor Co. (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1191, "\[t\]o consider the defendant's entire course of conduct in setting…

  10. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 27, 2009 · in the opinion

    Mahoney v. Georgia-Pacific, LLC (2009)

    …supra, 33 Cal.4th at pp. 795-796; Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co. (1981) 119 Cal.App.3d 757, 798-799.) Generally, it is improper for counsel to argue facts outside the evidence, or to engage…

  11. Court case · Oklahoma Supreme Court · October 25, 2022 · in the opinion

    Galier v. Murco Wall Products, Inc. (2022)

    …showing." Ford [\301] Motor, 141 S. Ct. at 1026. The Court noted that indeed, \[it\] has stated that specific jurisdiction attaches in cases identical to the ones here—when a company like Ford serves a market…

  12. Court case · California Court of Appeal · June 24, 2020 · in the opinion

    Collantes v. Elementis Chemicals, Inc. (2020)

    …Familian Corp. (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 969, 979 (Turley).) "\If there has been no exposure, there is no causation.'" (Petitpas v. Ford Motor Co. (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 261, 289; see Izell v. Union…

  13. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · July 26, 2007 · in the opinion

    Georgia-Pacific Corporation v. Stephens (2007)

    …of Appeals recently decided a case in which a brake worker had inhaled asbestos dust from installing the brake products of six different manufacturers. Vaughn v. Ford Motor Co., 91 S.W.3d 387, 393 (Tex…

  14. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 22, 2014 · in the opinion

    Izell v. Union Carbide Corporation (2014)

    …(2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 655, 690-691.) As our Supreme Court stated in Johnson v. Ford Motor Co. (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1191, "\[t\]o consider the defendant's entire course of conduct in setting…

  15. Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · July 8, 2013 · in the opinion

    Georgia Pacific v. Farrar (2013)

    …Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 125 Ohio St.3d 510, 929 N.E.2d 448 (2010); Campbell v. Ford Motor Co., 206 Cal.App.4th 15, 141 Cal. Rptr.3d 390 (2012); and In re Eighth Judicial…

  16. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · August 13, 2007 · in the opinion

    Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Stephens (2007)

    …Appeals recently decided a case in which a brake worker had inhaled asbestos dust from installing the brake products of six different manufacturers. Vaughn v. Ford Motor Co., 91 S.W.3d 387, 393 (Tex.App…

  17. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland · July 25, 2016 · in the opinion

    Arbogast v. AW Chesterton Co. (2016)

    …Grilli Marcus, Whiteford [\810] Taylor and Preston LLP, R. Thomas Radcliffe, Jr., Patrick C. Smith, Dehay and Elliston LLP, F. Ford Loker, Jr., Joshua Franklin Kahn, Leianne S. McEvoy, Michael L. Haslup, Matthew R. Schroll, Robin…

  18. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois · November 23, 2021 · in the opinion

    Johnson v. Orton (2021)

    …underpinnings" and "correctness of the expert's conclusions" may affect any ultimate determination on the merits, but do not govern admissibility. See Smith v. Ford Motor Co., 215 F.3d 713, 718-19 (7th Cir. 2000)…

  19. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 29, 2024 · in the opinion

    Watts v. Pneumo Abex, LLC (2024)

    …in brakes sold to end users. Various entities, including Bendix, Ford, and General Motors, purchased asbestos-containing friction material from Abex, [\256] but its most significant business came from Rayloc, which manufactured brake products that were…

  20. Court case · Georgia Court of Appeals · March 30, 2015 · in the opinion

    Scapa Dryer Fabrics, Inc. v. Knight (2015)

    …and consequently cannot have an error rate."); Anderson v. Ford Motor Co., 950 F.Supp.2d 1217, 1224-1225 (D.Utah 2013) ("every exposure" opinion excluded under Daubert as not testable and having no known error…