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

Search

135 results for “Owens-Corning Fiberglas”, page 4 of 7

  1. Court case · New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division · December 2, 2004 · in the opinion

    Holdampf v. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2004)

    …from secondary exposure to asbestos. The Port Authority also cites the Tenth Circuit's decision in Rohrbaugh v. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp. (965 F2d 844 \[10th Cir 1992) to support its argument that a plaintiff must…

  2. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 29, 2024 · in the opinion

    Watts v. Pneumo Abex, LLC (2024)

    …no evidence of sufficient sustainability to support the claim or defense of the party opposing the motion...." (Howard v. Owens Corning (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 621, 629-630 \[85 Cal.Rptr.2d 386\].) "On appeal…

  3. Court case · California Court of Appeal · September 13, 2021 · in the opinion

    Vanni v. Honeywell International, Inc. (2021)

    …reasonable inference and resolving conflicts in support of the judgment. (Howard v. Owens Corning (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 621, 630). In an asbestos-related injury case, causation involves two elements: exposure and substantial factor causation…

  4. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · December 19, 2008 · in the opinion

    Wright v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2008)

    …to give rise to a reasonable inference that he inhaled asbestos fibers from the product. See Coward v. Owens-Corning, 729 A.2d 614, 622-623 (Pa.Super.1999) (evidence must demonstrate that the plaintiff worked…

  5. Court case · Ohio Court of Appeals · June 28, 2007 · in the opinion

    DiCENZO v. A-Best Prods. Co., Inc. (2007)

    …estimate the percentage of insulation that each company supplied. {¶ 11} Owens Corning distributed asbestos-containing Kaylo insulation products from 1953 until 1973. Hamilton distributed Kaylo products from 1963. It sold insulation products to Wheeling Pittsburgh Steel…

  6. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · December 19, 2008 · in the opinion

    Weible v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2008)

    …reasonable inference that Mr. Weible inhaled asbestos fibers from the products. See Coward v. Owens-Corning, 729 A.2d 614, 622-623 (Pa.Super.1999) (evidence must demonstrate that the plaintiff worked, on a regular basis…

  7. Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · June 2, 2017 · in the opinion

    Landreth v. Brake Supply Company, Inc. (2017)

    …causation where there are many possible sources of asbestos exposure, jurisdictions have fashioned different causation standards: "1) the California Supreme Court's \exposure-to-risk' test of Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal.4th 953…

  8. Court case · Kentucky Court of Appeals · July 15, 2016 · in the opinion

    Mannahan v. Eaton Corporation (2016)

    …similar products at the same time periods and worksites. Not uncommonly, plaintiffs have been unable to prove direct exposure to a given defendant's product." Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 941 P.2d 1203, 1218 (Cal…

  9. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Maine · September 16, 2020 · in the opinion

    Coffin v. Ametek, Inc. (2020)

    …a specific product on a regular basis over some extended period of time in proximity to where the plaintiff actually worked.'" Id. (quoting Lohrmann v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp., 782 F.2d 1156, 1162-63 (4th Cir…

  10. Court case · California Supreme Court · December 1, 2016 · in the opinion

    Kesner v. Superior Court and Haver (2016)

    …. ."\]; accord, Alcaraz v. Vece (1997) 14 Cal.4th 1149, 1156.) In determining whether a premises owner owes a duty to persons on its property, we apply the Rowland factors. (See, e.g., Thai v. Stang (1989…

  11. Court case · Delaware Superior Court · April 11, 2023 · in the opinion

    Jordonek v. Hennessy Indus. (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2023)

    …Inc.\[1\] In Richards, the Supreme Court wrote: Our starting point to answer the Ohio law question is the Fourth Circuit's decision in Lohrmann v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp. In Lohrmann, the plaintiff argued that a…

  12. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · February 11, 2009

    Burger v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (2009)

    …Cork, DAP, Pneumo Abex and Owens-Illinois, ruling against Jon and Lois Burger. A plaintiff opposing summary judgment in an asbestos case must produce evidence that he inhaled asbestos fibers from the particular defendant's product…

  13. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 28, 2003

    Chavers v. Gatke Corp. (2003)

    …trial record also showed asbestos exposure during Navy service from 1958 to 1962. All defendants but Gatke Corporation and Owens-Illinois settled before trial. The plaintiffs admitted they had no evidence he used or worked around…

  14. Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 4, 2015

    Brady v. Crane Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation, 2015)

    Plaintiffs asked the New York County Supreme Court to consolidate thirteen asbestos cases for joint trial in two groups. All but one of the plaintiffs had lung cancer. Miceli and Ward had mesothelioma. Most had died, and Miller and Morgan were…

  15. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · January 8, 1998 · in the opinion

    Ford Motor v. Wood (1998)

    In Owens-Illinois v. Armstrong, 326 Md. 107, 604 A.2d 47, cert. denied, 506 U.S. 871, 113 S.Ct. 204, 121 L.Ed.2d 145 (1992) (hereinafter Armstrong II), the Court of Appeals first…

  16. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 3, 2016 · in the opinion

    Davis v. Honeywell International Inc. (2016)

    …Karst & Von Oiste and George H. Kim for Plaintiff and Respondent. CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION WILLHITE, Acting P.J. In Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953 (Rutherford), the California Supreme Court addressed the…

  17. Court case · Wisconsin Court of Appeals · November 19, 2013 · in the opinion

    Lemberger v. Honeywell International, Inc. (2013)

    …LEMBERGER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, ANCHOR PACKING COMPANY, BENDIX COMMERCIAL VEHICLE SYSTEMS, LLC, METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, OWENS ILLINOIS, INC., WAHL REFRACTORIES, INC., PRICE VIKING, HENNES SERVICES, INC., ZIEN MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS, INC…

  18. Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 2, 2017 · in the opinion

    Johnson v. ArvinMeritor, Inc. (2017)

    …was a substantial factor causing the illness by showing that in reasonable medical probability it was a substantial factor contributing to the plaintiff's or decedent's risk of developing cancer." (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc…

  19. Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · August 28, 2024 · in the opinion

    Day v. 3M Company Inc. (2024)

    …2003). Ultimately, "a jury is free to accept or to reject expert testimony in whole or in part or to accord it what probative value the jury deems appropriate." Owens v. Silvia, 838 A.2d 881…

  20. Court case · California Court of Appeal · March 17, 2017 · in the opinion

    Phillips v. Honeywell International Inc. (2017)

    …L.Rev. 1153, 1161.) This characteristic underlies our Supreme Court's conclusion in Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953 (Rutherford) that "\[i\]n an asbestos-related cancer case, the plaintiff need not…