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

Search

767 results for “General Electric”, page 28 of 39

  1. Court case · Montana Workers' Comp. Court · September 26, 2018 · in the opinion

    Atchley v. Louisiana Pacific Corp. (2018)

    …part, as follows: Once LA-contaminated soil is removed from properties \[in Libby\], various types of fill materials are used to backfill excavated areas. In general, fill materials consist of topsoil and topsoil amendments, common fill…

  2. Court case · Maryland Court of Appeals · April 7, 1992 · in the opinion

    Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Armstrong (1992)

    …283 Md. 296, 327, 389 A.2d 887, 905 (1978). Causation is a necessary element of any strict liability action. Phipps v. General Motors Corp., 278 Md. 337, 344, 363 A.2d 955, 958 (1976). In…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · August 20, 2010 · in the opinion

    Gitto v. AW Chesterton Co., Inc. (2010)

    …at 14-15). After the foundation was complete, the shipfitters were on standby in the general area of the ship when new pieces of equipment were installed by other tradesman. Mr. Gitto testified that while the…

  4. Court case · California Court of Appeal · November 17, 2016 · in the opinion

    Kordestani v. ExxonMOBIL Oil Corporation (2016)

    …the in limine motion \operate\[s\] as a general demurrer to \[the\] complaint or a motion for judgment on the pleadings.' \[Citations.\] \Alternatively,' where such motions are granted \at the outset of trial with reference to…

  5. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit · March 31, 2016 · in the opinion

    McINDOE v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2016)

    …death. McIndoe's heirs raised design, manufacture, and failure-to-warn claims based on theories of both strict products liability and general negligence. The case was removed to federal district court under 28 U.S.C. …

  6. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · March 23, 1984 · in the opinion

    Adams v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1984)

    …a "less desirable longshoreman" in the future. Id. at 668. Bonura is inapposite to the case at bar. Bonura was decided under general maritime law, not Louisiana law. Furthermore, the instant record does not support an…

  7. Court case · New York Supreme Court · May 16, 2019 · in the opinion

    Epstein v. Exxon Mobil Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2019)

    …Corporation is directed to serve a copy of this Order with Notice of Entry on all remaining parties, the Trial Support Clerk located in the General Clerk's Office (Room 119), and on the County Clerk…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · June 26, 2023 · in the opinion

    Perkins v. United States (2023)

    …engaged in the "ripout" or "tearout" of asbestos. The government fails to cite any authority for this proposition. It points to general studies, but does not demonstrate that Mr. Perkins did not "ripout" or "tearout" asbestos…

  9. Court case · Florida District Court of Appeal · September 6, 2017 · in the opinion

    Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation v. Britt (2017)

    …reliable methodology and peer-reviewed, published studies, and the general acceptance by the scientific community of the relationship between the inhalation of asbestos fibers and mesothelioma, distinguish the present case from the rejection, based on Daubert…

  10. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit · November 6, 1992 · in the opinion

    Tragarz v. Keene Corp. (1992)

    …was diagnosed as suffering from malignant pleural mesothelioma, a cancer that is extremely rare among the general population but not as rare among those occupationally exposed to asbestos fibers. Expert testimony in this case indicated that…

  11. Court case · Wisconsin Supreme Court · October 27, 1999 · in the opinion

    Sopha v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1999)

    …Wisconsin would not turn a deaf ear to argument that in a particular sort of case the policy reasons [\236] for allowing an exception override the policy reasons for applying the general rule. 236 Patzer v…

  12. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin · January 9, 1981 · in the opinion

    Neubauer v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas (1981)

    …one of the occasional hardships necessarily incident to a law arbitrarily making legal remedies contingent on mere lapse of time.'"' (Emphasis added.)" Applying the general rules set forth above on interpretation of Wisconsin statutes of limitations…

  13. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois · February 14, 2014 · in the opinion

    Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014)

    …Salisbury, 2014 WL 345214, at [\8]. This court will follow that middle path. In general, consistent with the bare metal defense, a manufacturer is not liable for materials it did not supply. But a duty may…

  14. Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 15, 2017 · in the opinion

    Saller v. Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc. (2017)

    …s defense depended on evidence of Johns-Manville's sophistication. "Although the record clearly show\[ed\] Johns-Manville was aware of the risks of asbestos in general, no evidence established it knew about the particularly acute…

  15. Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 24, 2013 · in the opinion

    Keeney v. AW Chesterton Company (2013)

    …however, to the general rule that \"the voluntary acceptance of the benefit of a judgment or order is a bar to the prosecution of an appeal therefrom..." ... where the appellant's right to the accepted portion…

  16. Court case · Iowa Supreme Court · January 19, 1994 · in the opinion

    Spaur v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1994)

    …neither prosecuted the action against OCF nor has attempted to extract a large penalty for the purpose of raising revenue. We find a clear distinction between the Fund and the general state treasury. See Burke v…

  17. Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · April 24, 2006 · in the opinion

    Olivo v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (2006)

    …625 A.2d 1110). B. Applying those general principles of tort liability to the facts of this case, the risk of injury to someone like Eleanor Olivo is one that should have been foreseeable to Exxon…

  18. Court case · Washington Supreme Court · June 4, 2009 · in the opinion

    Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc. (2009)

    …102 S.Ct. 2579, 73 L.Ed.2d 202 (1982)). \[12\] The express reservation test is similar to the rule of general retroactivity discussed by this court in pre-Robinson decisions. Haines, 87 Wash.2d at…

  19. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · October 1, 2014 · in the opinion

    Smith v. Union Carbide Corp. (2014)

    …at 3. "In general, a premises owner has a duty of exercising reasonable care for the safety of persons on its premises and a duty of not exposing such persons to unreasonable risks of injury or…

  20. Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · December 9, 2019 · in the opinion

    Shaffer v. AW Chesterton Co. (2019)

    …and loss of consortium. The complaint also set forth federal claims under the Jones Act and unseaworthiness under general maritime law against only some of the parties. The complaint was amended three times to add and…