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

Search

291 results for “Owens-Illinois”, page 5 of 15

  1. Court case · U.S. District Court, Central District of California · February 12, 2013 · in the opinion

    Nelson v. Air and Liquid Systems Corp. (2013)

    …Gypsum Co., 98 Cal. App.4th 1098, 1103, 120 Cal.Rptr.2d 23 (2002) (citations omitted) (citing Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal.4th 953, 975-76, 67 Cal.Rptr.2d 16, 941 P.2d…

  2. Court case · Iowa Court of Appeals · April 19, 2017 · in the opinion

    Kinseth v. WEIL-McLAIN Company (2017)

    …10% Peerless (boilers) 7% American Standard/Trane 7% Burnham 7% Crane 7% Cleaver Brooks 7% Hercules 10% JM (Johns-Manville) 15% GE 2% Yarway 0% Georgia-Pacific/Bestwall 3% Owens-Illinois 0% The exposures noted above…

  3. Court case · U.S. District Court, Southern District of California · August 18, 2014 · in the opinion

    Grande v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec, Inc. (2014)

    …developing asbestos-related cancer." McGonnell v. Kaiser Gypsum Co., 98 Cal. App. 4th 1098, 1103 (2002) (citing Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal. 4th 953, 975-76 (1997)); see also O'Neil v. Crane Co.…

  4. Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 21, 2014 · in the opinion

    Paulus v. Crane Co. (2014)

    …the defendant's asbestos products was, in reasonable medical probability, a substantial factor in causing or contributing to his risk of developing cancer." (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953, 957-958 \[67…

  5. Court case · California Court of Appeal · February 8, 2016 · in the opinion

    Lepore v. Kelsey-Hayes Co. (2016)

    …McGonnell v. Kaiser Gypsum Co. (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 1098, 1103 (McGonnell); see Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953, 976-977.) Direct evidence of exposure is not required; rather, the plaintiff…

  6. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of California · March 31, 2023 · in the opinion

    Elorreaga v. Rockwell Automation, Inc. (2023)

    …CV-00325-HSG, 2021 WL 1167638, at [\5] (N.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2021) (quoting Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal. 4th 953, 958, 67 Cal.Rptr.2d 16, 941 P.2d 1203 (Cal. 1997)…

  7. Court case · Maryland Court of Special Appeals · January 17, 2003 · in the opinion

    Garlock v. Gallagher (2003)

    …for judgment only after it "consider\[s\] all evidence and inferences in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion is made." Md. Rule 2-519(b); see also Owens-Illinois, Inc. v…

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

    Martin v. Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company (2009)

    …from several other states that find manufacturers and employers liable for asbestos-related illnesses from asbestos dust brought home from work. The best cases for Plaintiff are Olivo v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 895 A.2d 1143…

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

    Toy v. Armstrong Int'l (In re Toy Asbestos, 2021)

    …exposed to asbestos from Defendant's products; and (2) this exposure was a substantial factor in causing Mr. Toy's injury and death. See Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal. 4th 953, 968-69 (Cal…

  10. Court case · California Court of Appeal · July 5, 2017 · in the opinion

    Petitpas v. Ford Motor Company (2017)

    …exposed to asbestos-containing products from the Rossmoor project with such frequency, regularity, and proximity as to satisfy the causation standard articulated in Rutherford \[v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953 (Rutherford)\], Hernandez \[v…

  11. Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · December 20, 2006 · in the opinion

    Chaisson v. Avondale Industries, Inc. (2006)

    …Therefore, the foreseeability reasoning used by the Texas Court of Appeals is inapplicable. 183 The Supreme Court of New Jersey unanimously found a duty to protect from household asbestos exposure in Olivo v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.…

  12. Court case · Rhode Island Superior Court · June 13, 2013 · in the opinion

    Sweredoski v. Alfa Laval, Inc. (2013)

    …I. 1992) (finding same). 1 The "Exposure-to-Risk" Test The "exposure-to-risk" test is one standard of causation utilized in asbestos cases. See Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 16 Cal. 4th 953 (1997). In…

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

    Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (2019)

    …and Daniel P. Creed Co. Inc.; NMBFIL Inc., f/k/a Bondo Corp.; Owens-Illinois Inc.; Peerless Industries Inc.; Pneumo-Abex LLC, individually and as successor to Abex Corp.; Price Pfister Inc.; The Prudential Insurance Co…

  14. Court case · California Court of Appeal · September 1, 2009 · in the opinion

    Walmach v. Wheeler (2009)

    …At the most fundamental level, there is scientific uncertainty regarding the biological mechanisms by which inhalation of certain microscopic fibers of asbestos leads to lung cancer and mesothelioma." (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal…

  15. Court case · California Court of Appeal · May 18, 2021 · in the opinion

    Phipps v. Copeland Corporation LLC (2021)

    …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…

  16. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · May 16, 2018 · in the opinion

    Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (2018)

    …Co. and Daniel P. Creed Co. Inc.; NMBFIL INC., f/k/a Bondo Corp.; OWENS-ILLINOIS INC.; PEERLESS INDUSTRIES INC.; PNEUMO-ABEX LLC, individually and as successor to Abex Corp.; PRICE PFISTER INC.; THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE…

  17. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · January 25, 2012 · in the opinion

    Rabovsky v. Goulds Pumps (In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (NO. VI), 2012)

    …the ability to establish specific testing relating to a particular plaintiff is exceedingly problematic. See, e.g. Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, 941 P.2d 1203, 16 Cal. 4th 953, 957 (Ca.1997).\[5\] It is clear…

  18. Court case · Texas Supreme Court · July 11, 2014 · in the opinion

    Bostic v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. (2014)

    …in Flores we discussed the California Supreme Court's decision in Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.\[17\] That case described how expert testimony was presented from both sides establishing "that the plaintiffs' asbestos-related disease [\339…

  19. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 18, 2006 · in the opinion

    Weber v. John Crane, Inc. (2006)

    …the defendant with enough frequency and regularity as to show a reasonable medical probability that this exposure was a factor in causing the plaintiff's injuries. (Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (1997) 16 Cal.4th 953…

  20. Court case · U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey · December 19, 2016 · in the opinion

    Vesper v. 3M Company (2016)

    …Inc.; Honeywell International Inc.; IMO Industries Inc.; Ingersoll-Rand Company; Marley Wylain Company; Motion Control Industries; Notte Safety Appliance Company; Owens-Illinois, Inc.; Sid Harvey Industries, Inc.; Union Carbide Corporation; Warren Pumps; and Weil-McLain Company…