11 results for “Ford Motor Company”
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · April 16, 2013
Webber v. Ford Motor Company (2013)
The Superior Court reversed the trial court's orders opening and vacating the judgment entered for Ford, Abex and Honeywell and granting a mistrial, and denied the Webbers' motion to quash, so the defense judgment stood…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Supreme Court · November 22, 2016
Rost v. Ford Motor Co. (2016)
…affirmed the judgment for the Rost estates against Ford Motor Company, holding that the causation testimony was proper and that, although consolidation with two other cases was error, Ford showed no prejudice. An expert may tell…
-
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 · Pennsylvania Superior Court · April 30, 2010
Betz v. Pneumo Abex LLC (2010)
The Superior Court reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Allied Signal and Ford (and the other friction product defendants) and remanded, holding that the trial court wrongly granted the defendants' Frye motion excluding the…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · May 24, 2010 · in the opinion
Larson v. Georgia Pacific (In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, 2010)
…806 (\Admissibility decisions focus on the expert's method and reasoning; credibility decisions arise after admissibility has been determined.')." Pineda v. Ford Motor Company, 520 F.3d 237, 247 (3d Cir.2008). In evaluating whether a…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · February 16, 2011 · in the opinion
Anderson v. Salmon Bay and Gravel Co. (In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, 2011)
…Schiff, 602 F.3d 152, 172 (3d Cir. April 7, 2010) (quoting Pineda v. Ford Motor Co., 502 F.3d 237, 243-44 (3d Cir. 2008)). Defendant has not challenged the qualification of Plaintiffs' experts, so…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania · August 31, 1982 · in the opinion
Neal v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd. (1982)
…paying compensatory damages rather than changing the business practice which would result in extra costs. See, e.g., Wangen v. Ford Motor Co., 97 Wis.2d 260, 294 N.W.2d 437, 451-457 (1980); Sturm…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · April 10, 2024 · in the opinion
Fisher v. American International Industries (2024)
…containing product was sufficiently \frequent, regular and proximate' to support a jury's finding that \[the\] defendant's product was substantially causative of the disease." Rost v. Ford Motor Co., 151 A.3d 1032, 1044 (Pa…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · March 24, 2020 · in the opinion
Schrader v. Ameron International Corporation (2020)
…Ford Motor Co., 160 A.3d 1135 (Del. 2017) (unpublished disposition at 2017 WL 1422626 [\3]). In Walls, the decedent was exposed to asbestos from, among other sources, brake changes performed on Ford vehicles in the…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · August 5, 2014 · in the opinion
Nelson v. Airco Welders Supply (2014)
…Engineering, Ford Motor Co., Foseco, Inc., Foster Wheeler Corporation, Garlock, Inc., General Electric Company, General Motors Corp., George V. Hamilton, Inc., Georgia- Pacific Corporation, Gould Pumps, Inc., Green, Tweed & Company, Inc., Hajoca Plumbing Supply Company, Harnischfeger…
-
Court case · Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · September 30, 1996
Blase v. Allied Signal Inc. (1996)
Mildred Blase sued several companies after the death of her husband, Harold Blase, an auto mechanic at Bell of Pennsylvania. She claimed that working with the defendants' products, which allegedly contained asbestos, caused his lung cancer…