848 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 6 of 43
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · February 6, 2020
Schrank v. Amchem Prods., Inc. (2020)
The trial court granted Ford Motor Company's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint and cross claims against Ford, finding the plaintiffs' experts failed to show specific causation. In a toxic tort asbestos case…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · December 3, 2013
Barawa v. Acker Drill Co. (2013)
The court denied Ford Motor Company's motion for summary judgment except for the unopposed loss of consortium claim, which was dismissed; plaintiffs largely prevailed. Plaintiff's testimony of exposure over twenty-plus years to new…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · June 10, 2021
Aaron v. Bancroft Bag, Inc. (2021)
…because removing defendant Ford Motor Company did not prove an enforceable settlement with non-diverse defendant MSBI. A case with a non-diverse defendant becomes removable only when that defendant is clearly out of the case…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Pennsylvania · February 20, 2019
Gorton v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2019)
The court denied Ford's and AT&T Corp.'s motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction but granted their motions for failure to state a claim, dismissing both from the amended complaint without prejudice…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, District of Utah · March 23, 2023
Riegler v. Carlisle Companies, Incorporated (2023)
The court granted Ford's motion for summary judgment on all of Plaintiff's claims after excluding Dr. Staggs's specific causation opinion, and granted in part and denied in part the motions to exclude: Ewing…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · August 27, 2014
Smith v. Bmw OF North America LLC (2014)
…affirmed the trial court's summary judgment for Ford Motor Company and Borg-Warner Corporation, against the estate of Paul Rowland, represented by Amy Smith as executrix. A company is liable as an apparent manufacturer under…
-
Court case · Delaware Supreme Court · February 4, 2009 · in the opinion
General Motors Corporation v. Grenier (2009)
GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION and FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendants Below, Appellants, v. ROLAND LEO GRENIER, SR., Plaintiff Below, Appellee. Nos. 453, 2007, 578, 2007 Submitted: October 29, 2008. Decided: February 4, 2009. Supreme Court of Delaware Christian…
-
Court case · Louisiana Court of Appeals · February 3, 2017
Hayden v. 3M Co. (2017)
Thomas Hayden and his wife Jacqueline sued 3M Company and other corporations in Orleans Parish, Louisiana, in a case involving Mr. Hayden's mesothelioma. The opinion does not describe his work or exposure. Before trial, the…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit · February 22, 2021
Jack v. Dco, LLC (2021)
The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Union Pacific Railroad and judgment as a matter of law for Ford and DCo, so the Jacks lost on all claims. Under Washington law, a take-home exposure claim…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · August 10, 2018 · in the opinion
Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLC (2018)
(Ford MTE Castleman at 6.) However, the court notes that pursuant to Rule 703, an expert may disclose otherwise inadmissible underlying facts or data "if their probative value in helping the jury evaluate the opinion substantially…
-
Court case · U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · July 31, 2002
In re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. (2002)
Tens of thousands of people sued in state courts across the country, claiming that asbestos in friction products such as brake pads gave them or their relatives mesothelioma, lung, laryngeal or esophageal cancer, or asbestosis. They sued makers and…
-
Court case · Michigan Court of Appeals · January 11, 2007
Chapin v. A & L Parts, Inc. (2007)
…Ford, General Motors and Honeywell lost their challenge to the Chapins' expert evidence (one judge dissented). A trial court acting as gatekeeper under MRE 702 and MCL 600.2955(1) need not resolve genuine scientific disputes…
-
Court case · New York Supreme Court · July 10, 2006
Berger v. Amchem Prods. (2006)
The court denied DaimlerChrysler's motions (joined by Ford and General Motors) to preclude evidence that brake and clutch dust causes asbestos disease, to dismiss the complaints, and for a Frye hearing, so the plaintiffs (Berger…
-
Court case · California Court of Appeal · April 14, 2003
Cossman v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. (2003)
The Court of Appeal affirmed the nonsuit for the friction-product defendants (DaimlerChrysler, Ford, Mercedes-Benz USA, Volkswagen of America and Pneumo Abex), holding that Indiana's two-year statute of limitations barred the Cossmans' claims…
-
Court case · Delaware Supreme Court · July 22, 2019
Richards v. Copes-Vulcan, Inc. (2019)
The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Copes-Vulcan, Ford and Goodyear and the denial of the Richards' request to supplement their expert report or for reargument. Under Ohio law, Ohio Rev. Code § 2307.96…
-
Court case · Delaware Superior Court · April 8, 2009
Grenier v. General Motors Corp. (In re Asbestos Litigation, 2009)
…despite factual errors in its earlier opinion, it properly denied General Motors' and Ford's motion to exclude plaintiffs' general causation expert testimony, so Grenier's experts remained admissible. A plaintiff's expert need not disprove…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Supreme Court · May 23, 2012 · in the opinion
Betz v. Pneumo Abex LLC (2012)
Indeed, Appellant Ford Motor Company reads the responsive expressions of members of this Court in two recent decisions as recognizing that the any-exposure opinion facially implicates the Frye test. See Summers, 606 Pa. at 318…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington · September 17, 2018 · in the opinion
Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec, LLC (2018)
…the brands of brakes he worked on at Dexter, Mr. Jack testified that "\[s\]ome of them \[were\] Ford." (Id. at 131:17-20.) When Plaintiffs' counsel asked Mr. Jack if he used the arc grinder …
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana · May 28, 2015
Hayes v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd. (2015)
The court granted summary judgment to Honeywell (successor to Bendix) and Ford, dismissing plaintiffs' claims against them with prejudice for lack of product identification evidence. Under the Louisiana Products Liability Act, product identification is a threshold…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Western District of Louisiana · May 28, 2015
Hayes v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd. (2015)
The court granted summary judgment for Honeywell (successor to Bendix) and Ford, dismissing with prejudice the Hayes sons' claims over their father's mesothelioma death. Under the Louisiana Products Liability Act, a manufacturer is liable only…