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

Search

197 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 3 of 10

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · June 22, 2015 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2015)

    …("Consolidated Aluminum") (id. ¶ 6); (v) Dana Companies LLC, sued both individually, and, as successor-in-interest to Victor Gasket Manufacturing Company ("Dana") (id. ¶ 7); (vi) Ford Motor Company ("Ford") (id. ¶ 8); and (vii) Unilever United States…

  2. Court case · Missouri Court of Appeals · February 2, 1993 · in the opinion

    Harashe v. Flintkote Co. (1993)

    …Ackerman v. Globe-Democrat Publishing Company, 368 S.W.2d 469 (Mo.1963) \[4,5\]. W.R. Grace has successor liability for the liabilities of Zonolite. See, id.; Ernst v. Ford Motor Company, 813 S.W…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan · May 12, 1987 · in the opinion

    Marshall v. Celotex Corp. (1987)

    …by demonstrating defendants' concerted activity, and proximate cause, by demonstrating that defendants' conduct "was so significant and important a cause that \[defendants\] should be legally responsible." Cousineau v. Ford Motor Company, 140 Mich.App. 19, 35…

  4. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · September 29, 2015 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2015)

    …("Consolidated Aluminum") (id. ¶ 6); (v) Dana Companies LLC, sued both individually, and, as successor-in-interest to Victor Gasket Manufacturing Company ("Dana") (id. ¶ 7); (vi) Ford Motor Company ("Ford") (id. ¶ 8); and (vii) Unilever United States…

  5. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · October 29, 2013 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Agco Corp. (2013)

    …Inc. ("Consolidated Aluminum"); (v) Dana Companies LLC, sued individually and as successor-in-interest to Victor Gasket Manufacturing Company ("Dana"); (vi) Ford Motor Company ("Ford"); (vii) Metropolitan Life Insurance Company ("MetLife"); (viii) TVA; and (ix) Unilever…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · August 25, 2014 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2014)

    …Inc. ("Consolidated Aluminum"); (v) Dana Companies LLC, sued individually and as successor-in-interest to Victor Gasket Manufacturing Company ("Dana"); (vi) Ford Motor Company ("Ford"); (vii) Metropolitan Life Insurance Company ("MetLife"); (viii) TVA; and (ix) Unilever…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · May 27, 2015 · in the opinion

    Schwartz v. Abex Corp. (2015)

    …494, 709 A.2d 139 (Md. 1998) (involving asbestos-containing replacement brakes used with motor vehicles manufactured by Ford Motor Company). Because the issue is on appeal, the Court has not considered Maryland state law as…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · October 28, 2013 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Agco Corporation (2013)

    …Inc. ("Consolidated Aluminum"); (v) Dana Companies LLC, sued individually and as successor-in-interest to Victor Gasket Manufacturing Company ("Dana"); (vi) Ford Motor Company ("Ford"); (vii) Metropolitan Life Insurance Company ("MetLife"); (viii) TVA; and (ix) Unilever…

  9. Court case · Tennessee Court of Appeals · October 14, 2009 · in the opinion

    Nye v. Bayer Cropscience, Inc. (2009)

    …its employees of the dangerous nature of the product was the proximate cause of the accident." Whitehead, 775 S. W. 2d 593, 599 — 600 (citing Ford Motor Company v. Wagoner, 183 Tenn. 392, 192 S.W…

  10. Court case · New York Supreme Court · June 20, 2017

    Altman v. Ford Motor Co. (In re New York City Asbetos Litigation, 2017)

    …Benicia Pump Repair Benicia 1950s-1980s; helper in boiler and furnace removal and installation stepfather's boiler and furnace business 1950s; worker at a construction products company 1970s; handyman 1970s and 1980s; union carpenter various construction…

  11. Court case · New York Supreme Court · September 8, 2010

    Horn v. A.W. Chesterson Co. (In re Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig., 2010)

    Ten asbestos cases, brought by plaintiffs represented by the same law firm, were assigned to one New York County judge for trial. Eight of the plaintiffs, alleging mesothelioma, asked the court to consolidate their cases into three groups for joint…

  12. Court case · New Jersey Supreme Court · November 19, 2019 · in the opinion

    Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (2019)

    …mentioning. The product manufacturer (1) "has the knowledge and ability to warn of the dangers of the joint use of the products, especially if the other company's product is a \wear item,'" id. at 472…

  13. Court case · Washington Court of Appeals · April 3, 2017 · in the opinion

    Woo v. General Electric Company (2017)

    …9\]. . . . In addition, there are some cases where the combination of two sound products creates a dangerous condition, and both manufacturers have a duty to warn. \[Ford Motor Co. v. Wood, 119 Md. App. 1, 34…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois · June 25, 2010 · in the opinion

    Glein v. Boeing Company (2010)

    …a Viacom, Inc. f/k/a Westinghouse Electric Corp.; Certain Teed Corp.; Crown Cork & Seal Co.; Dana Corp.; Deere & Co.; Ford Motor Co.; Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC; General Dynamics Corp.; General Electric Co.; Georgia Pacific, LLC;…

  15. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Kansas · November 20, 2018 · in the opinion

    Little v. Budd Company (2018)

    …the total dose" which "is an \irrefutable scientific fact,' and it is \well-established' that the threshold level for developing mesothelioma is unknown." Id. (quoting Rost v. Ford Motor Co., 151 A.3d 1032, 1045 (Pa…

  16. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 30, 2019 · in the opinion

    Lopez v. the Hillshire Brands Company (2019)

    …harm. It cites the rule that "\\[m\]ere presence at a site where asbestos was present is insufficient to establish legally significant asbestos exposure.'" (Petitpas v. Ford Motor Co. (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 261, 288…

  17. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 8, 2018 · in the opinion

    Foglia v. Moore Dry Dock Company (2018)

    …transmission." (Id. at p. 1140; followed by Petitpas v. Ford Motor Co. (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 261, 275-276.) The court limited the duty to "members of a worker's household, i.e., persons who…

  18. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina · December 29, 2014 · in the opinion

    Sparkman v. AW Chesterton Company (2014)

    …Feb. 28, 2012); Whiting v. CBS Corp., 982 N.E.2d 1224, at [\1] (Mass. App. Ct. 2013); Ford Motor Co. v. Wood, 703 A.2d 1315, 1332 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1998); Rumery v. Garlock…

  19. Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit · January 27, 2009 · in the opinion

    Martin v. Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company (2009)

    …II. ANALYSIS A. Standard of Review As this is a diversity action, Kentucky substantive law applies. Gahafer v. Ford Motor Co., 328 F.3d 859, 861 (6th Cir. 2003). Procedurally, federal standards for summary judgment govern…

  20. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 30, 2021 · in the opinion

    Pizarro v. National Steel and Shipbuilding Company (2021)

    …formulated. These inferences cannot be based merely on speculation, but they may be established by circumstantial evidence, in accordance with ordinary standards of proof. Romo v. Ford Motor Co., 99 Cal.App. 4th 1115, 1141 (2002)…