767 results for “General Electric”, page 29 of 39
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · September 21, 2012 · in the opinion
Robinson v. Ssw, Inc. (2012)
…to specific enumerated "chapters and sections ... to the exclusion of the law of the jurisdiction in which they are [\600] incorporated." These specific enumerated provisions include neither chapter 2 in general nor section 2010 in particular. (…
-
Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · June 5, 1995 · in the opinion
Ripa v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas (1995)
…insufficient showing of notice of the many Saranac documents which the jury was led to believe were known to Owens-Corning which still marketed Kaylo with no warnings to the end users. As a general rule…
-
Court case · Illinois Appellate Court · April 13, 2005 · in the opinion
Flanders v. California Coastal Communities (2005)
…There are, however, four exceptions to this general rule: "(1) where there is an express or implied agreement of assumption; (2) where the transaction amounts to a consolidation or merger of the purchaser or seller corporation;…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 8, 2014 · in the opinion
Ganoe v. Metalclad Insulation Corporation (2014)
…response, the plaintiff provided "little more than general allegations against" the defendant and "d\[id\] not state specific facts showing that \[the plaintiff\] was actually exposed to asbestos-containing material from \[the defendant's\] products." (Id…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 28, 2008 · in the opinion
Garza v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd. (2008)
…sufficient contact with the state for the court to assume either general or limited jurisdiction over it. Plaintiffs opposed the motion, asserting among other things that ACL had consented to jurisdiction by making a general appearance…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois · December 22, 2014 · in the opinion
Krik v. Crane Co. (2014)
…Arnold Brody, who intend to testify that, in general, each and every exposure to asbestos products results in injury to the person so exposed. Krik believes that this testimony will help him to establish that his…
-
Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · July 22, 2019 · in the opinion
Coffman v. Armstrong International, Inc. (2019)
…the general duty of care includes a duty to warn when the manufacturer "knows or has reason to know" that its product "is or is likely to be dangerous for the use for which it is…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of California · March 17, 2014 · in the opinion
Willis v. Buffalo Pumps Inc. (2014)
…or dust allaying media. (Stewart Decl. ex G).\[2\] Plaintiff also emphasizes Defendant's concession that it was familiar with and subject to California general industry safety orders (Caldo Trans. 2162:16-22), that it knew…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · September 7, 2011 · in the opinion
Kelemen v. John Crane, Inc. (2011)
…erroneous instruction. . . ."'" (Soule v. General Motors Corp. (1994) 8 Cal.4th 548, 574.) When determining whether an error of instruction and/or instructional omission was prejudicial, the court must evaluate the state of the evidence, the…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · September 29, 2022 · in the opinion
Hotard v. Avondale Industries, Inc. (2022)
…the evidence suggests that they nevertheless mandated asbestos-containing materials be used in the Vessels' construction without warning the general contractor or any subcontractors about the risks of asbestos or how to safely handle the substance…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit · June 11, 1984 · in the opinion
Hansen v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1984)
…Navy during the Korean conflict and that he was classified as a pipefitter, but that his job was more properly characterized as a general handyman. Most of the pipefitting work was done on shore by others…
-
Court case · West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals · November 15, 1996 · in the opinion
Marlin v. Bill Rich Const., Inc. (1996)
…Va.Code § 29-12A-5(a)(5) stated the common-law rule that a cause of action is not recognized for the breach of a general duty owed the public as a whole. Randall then recognized…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio · May 3, 2004 · in the opinion
Bartel v. John Crane, Inc. (2004)
…§§ 688, et seq., the General Admiralty and Maritime law, and traditional product liability law. ECF No. 1. Lindstrom claims that he contracted this disease as a result of his work-life exposures to asbestos and asbestos…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 30, 2017 · in the opinion
Johnson v. Dock (2017)
…response, the plaintiff provided "little more than general allegations against" the defendant and did "not state specific facts showing that \[the plaintiff\] was actually exposed to asbestos-containing material from \[the defendant's\] products." (Ibid., italics…
-
Court case · Texas Supreme Court · May 8, 2015 · in the opinion
Abutahoun v. Dow Chemical Company (2015)
…Thereafter, the Court adopted the RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 414 (1977) approach for imposing liability on a property owner or general contractor that controls the work of an independent contractor who is negligently injured. See Redinger…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · January 15, 2010 · in the opinion
Union Carbide Corporation v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (2010)
…conflicting inference we must ignore. (Kuhn v. Department of General Services (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1627, 1632-1633 \[all reasonable inferences in favor of the judgment must be indulged\].) II. The use of John's…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina · October 14, 2020 · in the opinion
Finch v. Covil Corporation (2020)
…nature of Mr. White's representation. \[5\] Section 33-14-107(b) requires that the notice "(1) be published once in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the dissolved corporation's principal office. …
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 28, 1996 · in the opinion
Jenkins v. T & N Plc (1996)
…defendants, including T&N. The complaint contained causes of action for strict liability and loss of consortium. In addition to general and special damages, the Jenkinses sought damages for loss of earnings, income and earning capacity. ...…
-
Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · May 5, 2016 · in the opinion
Watkins v. Affinia Group (2016)
…been tested, (2) whether it has been subjected to peer review, (3) whether there is a known or potential rate of error, and (4) whether the methodology has gained general acceptance. Id. at 593-594, 113…
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · December 9, 2009 · in the opinion
Bourque v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (2009)
…Kuchler, Polk, Schell, etal., New Orleans, LA, for Defendants/Appellees, General Motors, Ford Motor Company. Court composed of JIMMIE C. PETERS, MARC T. AMY and MICHAEL G. SULLIVAN, Judges. AMY, Judge. Former employee and wife brought…