9 results for “Ford Motor Company”
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 2013
Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer (2013)
The Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the jury verdict and judgment for the estate against Ford and Honeywell (Bendix) because of the "substantial contributing factor" jury instructions, and remanded for further proceedings under a multiple-sufficient…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 1992 · in the opinion
Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Watson (1992)
…984, 989, 128 S.E.2d 273, 277 (1962) (citations omitted). See also Ford Motor Co. v. Phelps, 239 Va. 272, 276, 389 S.E.2d 454, 457 (1990); General Motors Corp. v. Lupica, 237 Va…
-
State law · Virginia
Virginia Mesothelioma Lawyer: Asbestos Claims, Deadlines & Compensation
…10, 2013) — Shipyard worker's mesothelioma claim against a vessel owner under 33 U.S.C. § 905(b), decided under maritime principles. Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer, 285 Va. 141 (2013) — Causation in multiple-exposure mesothelioma…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia · November 19, 2015 · in the opinion
Wilson v. AC&S, Inc. (2015)
…it is more likely than not" that plaintiff's alleged exposure to asbestos from defendant's product "occurred prior to the development" of his illness and "was sufficient to cause" his illness. Ford Motor Co. v…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 2013 · in the opinion
Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Minton (2013)
…proceedings if he be so advised. \[1\] We have today rejected the substantial contributing factor analysis of proximate causation in cases tried under Virginia law when multiple sufficient causation is alleged. Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · January 10, 2013 · in the opinion
Kiser v. AW Chesterton Co. (2013)
…original asbestosis suit. Given our current state of medical knowledge, however, it is not even possible to determine with certainty which disease stemmed from what asbestos exposure(s). See Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer, 285 Va. \…
-
Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia · September 28, 2018 · in the opinion
Goodrich v. John Crane, Inc. (2018)
…702. Courts have condensed these requirements into two primary inquiries: "1) whether the proposed expert's testimony is relevant; and 2) whether it is reliable." Yates v. Ford Motor Co., No. 5:12-CV-752-FL…
-
Court case · Virginia Supreme Court · October 11, 2018 · in the opinion
Quisenberry v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2018)
…factor' in the duty assessment under Pennsylvania law." (citation omitted)); Cf. Miller v. Ford Motor Co., 740 N.W.2d 206, 209-10 (Mich. 2007) (holding the owner of "property on which asbestos-containing products were…
-
Exposure sites · Virginia
Virginia Asbestos Exposure Sites: Worksites, Industries, and Trust Coverage
…and Appalachian Power's Glen Lyn plant; and the power stations — VEPCO's Chesterfield and Possum Point stations and the Potomac River plant at Alexandria. When these companies went bankrupt, the trusts set up to pay…