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

Search

80 results for “Ford Motor Company”, page 1 of 4

  1. Court case · Texas Court of Appeals · June 10, 2008

    Ford Motor Company v. Miller (2008)

    The Texas Court of Appeals reversed the $10,000,000 jury verdict and rendered judgment for Ford Motor Company, holding Ford owed no duty to Carolyn Miller and that John Roland had no compensable injury or…

  2. Court case · New York Supreme Court · September 15, 2023

    Munna v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (2023)

    Joseph Munna sued American Honda, many other vehicle and parts companies, and others over lung cancer he attributed to asbestos. This decision did not address liability. Munna asked the New York County Supreme Court to try…

  3. Court case · Michigan Supreme Court · July 25, 2007

    In re Certified Question From the Fourteenth District Court OF Appeals OF Texas (2007)

    …appeals court in the negative, holding that Ford owed no duty to Carolyn Miller, which favored Ford and went against the Miller plaintiffs' $9.5 million Texas verdict theory. Under Michigan law, a duty depends on…

  4. 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…

  5. 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…

  6. Court case · New York Supreme Court · November 20, 2019

    Temperino v. Amchem Prods. (2019)

    …without prejudice to renewal at trial; Ford's motion was marked withdrawn. Conflicting expert reports on whether exposure caused lung cancer raise credibility issues that cannot be resolved on summary judgment. The court deferred ruling on…

  7. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 26, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)

    …exposed to asbestos from Ford vehicles, plaintiffs' claims stand. Accordingly, Ford's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. v. Navistar, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment Navistar, Inc. (f/k/a International Harvester Company) contends that…

  8. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 26, 2022

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)

    The district court denied the summary judgment motions of BMW, Volkswagen and Honeywell (joined by Ford, Pneumo Abex and Morse TEC) and denied the defendants' motions in limine, so the plaintiffs' causation experts could testify, limited…

  9. Court case · New York Supreme Court · August 8, 2012

    Adler v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2012)

    Twenty-two plaintiffs, all represented by the same lawyers, sued more than eighty defendants in New York County for asbestos-related injuries or deaths. Seven had lung cancer, fourteen had pleural mesothelioma, and Glenda Vega had peritoneal…

  10. Court case · California Court of Appeal · October 30, 2013 · in the opinion

    Steiner v. Volkswagen Group OF America, Inc. (2013)

    …Yukevich, Steven D. Smelser, Patricia Ball; Dykema Gossett, John M. Thomas, Tamara A. Bush, for Appellant Ford Motor Company. Herzfeld & Rubin, Craig L. Winterman, Tara-Jane Flynn; Carroll, Burdick & McDonough, Laurie J. Hepler, Nathaniel K. Fisher…

  11. Court case · New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division · May 2, 2016 · in the opinion

    Whelan v. Armstrong Int'l (2016)

    …Newark, argued the cause on May 2, 2016, and Sean M. Marotta argued the cause on May 16, 2018, for respondent Ford Motor Company (LeClair Ryan, attorneys; Robin Gnudi Kalocsay, Newark, and Michael D. Goldklang, on…

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

    Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (2018)

    …cause on May 2, 2016, and Sean M. Marotta argued the cause on May 16, 2018, for respondent Ford Motor Company (LeClair Ryan, attorneys; Robin Gnudi Kalocsay and Michael D. Goldklang, on the brief). Marc S…

  13. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 8, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Company (2022)

    …Insurance Company, Bayer CropScience, Inc., BMW of North America, LLC, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London and London Market Companies, Eagle, Inc., Ford Motor Company, Foster Wheeler LLC, General Electric Company, ViacomCBS Inc., Gulf Engineering Company…

  14. Court case · U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana · August 25, 2022 · in the opinion

    Becnel v. Lamorak Insurance Co. (2022)

    …have also joined and adopted these various motions, including American Insurance Company, International Paper Company, Uniroyal Holding, Inc., Pneumo Abex, LLC, BMW of North America, LLC, Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Ford Motor Company, gulf Engineering…

  15. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · June 22, 2015 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2015)

    …("Consolidated Aluminum") (id. ¶ 6); (v) Dana Companies LLC, sued both individually, and, as successor-in-interest to Victor Gasket Manufacturing Company ("Dana") (id. ¶ 7); (vi) Ford Motor Company ("Ford") (id. ¶ 8); and (vii) Unilever United States…

  16. Court case · Maine Supreme Judicial Court · October 15, 1986 · in the opinion

    Bernier v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1986)

    …his wife in his suit against the manufacturer. \[6\] In reaching this conclusion in Adams, we relied upon Williams v. Ford Motor Company, 342 A.2d 712, 718 (1975), a case involving the question of when…

  17. Court case · Pennsylvania Superior Court · December 28, 2017 · in the opinion

    Roverano v. John Crane, Inc. (2017)

    …cases, "Pennsylvania law requires that a plaintiff prove two elements: "that the product was defective, and that the defect was the substantial factor in causing the injury." Rost v. Ford Motor Company, 637 Pa. 625, 151…

  18. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · September 29, 2015 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2015)

    …("Consolidated Aluminum") (id. ¶ 6); (v) Dana Companies LLC, sued both individually, and, as successor-in-interest to Victor Gasket Manufacturing Company ("Dana") (id. ¶ 7); (vi) Ford Motor Company ("Ford") (id. ¶ 8); and (vii) Unilever United States…

  19. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · October 29, 2013 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Agco Corp. (2013)

    …Inc. ("Consolidated Aluminum"); (v) Dana Companies LLC, sued individually and as successor-in-interest to Victor Gasket Manufacturing Company ("Dana"); (vi) Ford Motor Company ("Ford"); (vii) Metropolitan Life Insurance Company ("MetLife"); (viii) TVA; and (ix) Unilever…

  20. Court case · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama · August 25, 2014 · in the opinion

    Bobo v. Tennessee Valley Authority (2014)

    …Inc. ("Consolidated Aluminum"); (v) Dana Companies LLC, sued individually and as successor-in-interest to Victor Gasket Manufacturing Company ("Dana"); (vi) Ford Motor Company ("Ford"); (vii) Metropolitan Life Insurance Company ("MetLife"); (viii) TVA; and (ix) Unilever…