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

Search

434 results for “General Electric”, page 20 of 22

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · August 28, 2015 · in the opinion

    McALVEY v. Atlas Copco Compressors, LLC (2015)

    …limited to the frequency, regularity and proximity of Plaintiff's exposure to asbestos products in general and his conclusion that Plaintiff experienced a significant exposure to asbestos based on his work activities. Finally, Defendants argue that…

  2. Court case · Indiana Supreme Court · March 25, 2003 · in the opinion

    Harris v. AC & S., Inc. (2003)

    …was proximately caused by his exposure to asbestos-containing products provided by the Defendants. The Indiana General Assembly has enacted two statutes that limit the period of time within which individuals can file product liability claims…

  3. Court case · Washington Supreme Court · August 9, 2007 · in the opinion

    Herring v. Texaco, Inc. (2007)

    …bar date order has preclusive effect, it would call into question the "right to maintain the action," which implicates an exception to the general rule that this court will decline to review arguments abandoned below. Id…

  4. Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · June 14, 1990 · in the opinion

    Owens Corning Fiberglas v. Ind. Comm'n (1990)

    …(See A.O. Smith Corp., 109 Ill.2d 52, 485 N.E.2d 335; General American Life Insurance Co. v. Industrial Comm'n (1983), 97 Ill.2d 359, 454 N.E.2d 643.) That the claimant…

  5. Court case · Texas Supreme Court · June 8, 2007 · in the opinion

    Borg-Warner Corporation v. Flores (2007)

    …REV. RESPIRATORY DISEASE 363, 363-68 (1996)). One text notes that: There is general agreement from epidemiologic studies that the development of asbestosis requires heavy exposure to asbestos. . . in the range of 25 to 100 fibers…

  6. Court case · California Supreme Court · January 25, 1999 · in the opinion

    Chevron USA, Inc. v. Wcab (1999)

    …health and safety and general welfare of any and all workers and those dependent upon them for support to the extent of relieving from the consequences of any injury or death incurred or sustained by workers…

  7. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit · April 7, 1981 · in the opinion

    Clutter v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981)

    …does not apply to cases already filed before the amendment was enacted. Section 28 of the Ohio Constitution states that the "general assembly shall have no power to pass retroactive laws, ..." Section 1.58(A)(1…

  8. Court case · Minnesota Court of Appeals · June 13, 1989 · in the opinion

    Kath v. Burlington Northern R. Co. (1989)

    …rejected this requested interrogatory, Burlington claims reversible error. The general rule is that parties are entitled to have all issues of fact submitted to the jury except those which are waived. Wormsbecker v. Donovan Construction Co…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri · October 3, 2017 · in the opinion

    Holzer v. Athene Annuity & Life Assurance Co. (2017)

    …the mine. The general rule governing the personal liability of an officer or director of a corporation for torts committed by the corporation is that he is not liable where he has not participated therein, nor…

  10. Court case · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · March 6, 1997 · in the opinion

    Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Henkel (1997)

    …was rendered untimely by the enactment of Section 12-311. OCF acknowledges that "the general purpose underlying Section 12-311 was to expand the period of time in which plaintiffs could sue to recover for asbestos…

  11. Court case · Tennessee Supreme Court · March 1, 2001 · in the opinion

    Mackie v. Young Sales Corp. (2001)

    …related injury has resulted in the employee's death, workers' compensation benefits are to be paid to the surviving dependents of the employee. Jones v. General Accident Ins. Co. of America, 856 S.W.2d 133…

  12. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Indiana · May 14, 2010 · in the opinion

    Aurand v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company (2010)

    …See Forry, 837 F.2d at 263 (emphasizing that FELA release interpretation must take the parties' intent into account and that "general language of release will not encompass claims of which the releasor was unaware"). Norfolk…

  13. Court case · Texas Supreme Court · June 5, 1998 · in the opinion

    Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Malone (1998)

    …awards by holding that procedural safeguards provide all the protection that is necessary. See, e.g., Scheufler v. General Host Corp., 126 F.3d 1261, 1272 (10 th Cir.1997); Cathey v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp.…

  14. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · February 27, 2024 · in the opinion

    Burford v. Howmet Aerospace, Inc. (2024)

    …In the second approach, "\[t\]he finder of fact is asked to infer that because the risk is demonstrably greater in the general population due to exposure to the substance, the claimant's injury was more…

  15. Court case · Delaware Superior Court · May 16, 1985 · in the opinion

    Sheppard v. AC & S. Co. (1985)

    …Daum on May 24, 1982. On the other hand, the defendants' position is [\1130] that the cause of action is time-barred due to presence of general symptoms, namely, shortness of breath, as early as 1974…

  16. Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · March 19, 2009 · in the opinion

    Riedel v. Consolidated Rail Corporation (2009)

    …make it into the final draft. The court stated that "while the General Assembly may well have intended all asbestos-related cancer claims to be subject to the new legislation, that intent is not clearly expressed…

  17. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · October 3, 2003 · in the opinion

    Hughes v. Olin Corporation (2003)

    …225] The doctrine of contra non valentem agere nulla currit praescriptio acts as an exception to the general rules of prescription by suspending the running of prescription when the circumstances of the case fall into one…

  18. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · August 5, 1985 · in the opinion

    Rosenberg v. Celotex Corp. (1985)

    …101, 108 N.E. 217 (1915), and Carrick v. Central General Hospital, 51 N.Y.2d 242, 434 N.Y.S.2d 130, 414 N.E.2d 632 (1980), in support of her argument that she…

  19. Court case · California Court of Appeal · December 14, 2006 · in the opinion

    Quarles v. Advocate Mines Limited (2006)

    …specialist in occupational medicine called by Quarles, testified not about any specific facts of this case, but about the evolving general state of knowledge in medicine, science and industry, and about the dangers of asbestos in…

  20. Court case · Alabama Court of Civil Appeals · September 24, 1999 · in the opinion

    Wilkerson v. Burlington Northern RR Company (1999)

    …not sufficient to warrant making a diagnosis of pulmonary asbestosis." Dr. Shelton's medical records reflect that Wilkerson had obtained an annual general physical examination from him over the past 10 years, and they indicated Dr…