33 results for “General Electric”, page 2 of 2
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · August 31, 2017 · in the opinion
Cole v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company (2017)
…chemicals. Id. at 692. Each employee had previously executed a general release in the course of settling unrelated FELA claims. Id. These releases "appeared to settle all claims for all injuries past and future." Id. In…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · September 22, 1989 · in the opinion
Roller v. Basic Const. Co. (1989)
…the time of occurrence of an "injury by accident" is ordinarily obvious. But the General Assembly, realizing that ascertainment of this critical point in time would present great difficulty in the case of the insidious onset…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia · October 20, 1981 · in the opinion
Large v. Bucyrus-Erie Co. (1981)
…was exposed to silica and asbestos dust while operating the machines. Of course, the general rule in Virginia is that the limitations period begins to run when the initial injury, even if relatively slight, is sustained…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 1992 · in the opinion
Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Watson (1992)
…omitted). See also Ford Motor Co. v. Phelps, 239 Va. 272, 276, 389 S.E.2d 454, 457 (1990); General Motors Corp. v. Lupica, 237 Va. 516, 521, 379 S.E.2d 311, 314 (1989). Additionally…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia · September 28, 2018 · in the opinion
Goodrich v. John Crane, Inc. (2018)
…or videotapes of insulated pipes or systems on ships and insinuating\] that the insulation \[shown\] . . . was asbestos, in general, or amosite asbestos, in particular and that Mr. Goodrich would have been exposed to friable asbestos from. …
-
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 · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia · April 27, 2020 · in the opinion
Mullinex v. John Crane, Inc. (2020)
…§ 1333(1) and 46 U.S.C. § 30101 and the general admiralty and maritime law of the United States." ECF No. 1-4 ¶ 7. JCI does not seek to dismiss any particular claim in the Amended…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · November 1, 2012 · in the opinion
Gibbs v. Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Company (2012)
…hazard of life itself. It is difficult to imagine that the General Assembly intended to include it within the term "contract of hire," however broadly defined. For the purposes of this appeal, it is not necessary…
-
Court case · Virginia Court of Appeals · August 27, 2002 · in the opinion
Robertson v. DuPONT (2002)
…Williams to apply the special method for calculating average weekly wage set out in Code § 65.1-52 rather than the general method in Code § 65.1-6\[4\] may be explained by the fact that…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia · February 7, 2025 · in the opinion
Llt Management LLC v. Emory (2025)
…But the defendants' article did not merely cement the link to cancer in general—it purported to tie cosmetic talc to "mesothelioma," which the defendants admit had not been the focus of earlier publicity around the…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 2013 · in the opinion
Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Minton (2013)
…Scindia, 451 U.S. at 167. Exxon argues that there was no active involvement because its supervision did not extend beyond general oversight. Using the language of the court in Dow v. Oldendorff Carriers GMBH & Co.…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia · August 24, 2018 · in the opinion
Goodrich v. John Crane, Inc. (2018)
…not relevant evidence of the "state of the art." JCI argues that evidence of the Navy's knowledge is a "critical component" of the general knowledge and state of the art literature concerning asbestos health hazards…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · November 21, 1979 · in the opinion
Caudle-Hyatt, Inc. v. Mixon (1979)
…husband's earnings. It is highly unlikely that the General Assembly intended to restrict the conclusive presumption of total dependency to instances where the spouse had demonstrated that he or she was wholly dependent. Such a…